# data[].attributes.headline
Résaux sociaux, rapprochement ou éloignement entre personnes?

# data[].attributes.subject
Résaux sociaux, rapprochement ou éloignement entre personnes?

# data[].attributes.headline
Quel Rôle ont les résaux sociaux dans les relations humaines?

# data[].attributes.subject
Quel Rôle ont les résaux sociaux dans les relations humaines?

# data[].attributes.headline
Les résaux sociaux, source de bonheur ou de souffrance?

# data[].attributes.subject
Les résaux sociaux, source de bonheur ou de souffrance?

# data[].attributes.headline
Fast fashion: an environmental and cultural issue.

# data[].attributes.subject
Fast fashion: an environmental and cultural issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tablet est le meilleur site intellectuel juif et américain du Net. Et sa fondatrice, Alana Newhouse, vient de mettre en ligne un texte qui mérite le détour, tant il détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain contemporain, étouffé par la culture woke. Pour Newhouse, la vie culturelle et sociale américaines sont en ruines, minées par un phénomène qui voit l'idéologie remplacer la créativité.

Un système en ruines ?

Premier constat : alors qu'Alana Newhouse s'étonnait auprès d'amis médecins des carences du système médical aux Etats-Unis, leur réponse a été : " Il y a encore des gens très bien dans le secteur médical américain, mais en tant que système, il est en morceaux, esquinté, détruit. Les erreurs médicales sont devenues la troisième cause de mortalité dans le pays. On surmédicalise les patients. On multiplie les opérations inutiles. Les hôpitaux sont tombés sous la coupe de leurs administrateurs." Avant de l'interroger à leur tour : "Explique-nous, toi la journaliste, pourquoi le journalisme semble tombé si bas ?" Lorsque, dans un pays, tout le monde constate, dans son domaine, une évidente dégradation du niveau des performances, on est amené à se poser la question : ne serait-ce pas le système tout entier qui serait tombé en ruines, sans qu'on y ait pris garde ?

Ceci n'est pas valable que pour les Etats-Unis. Pour avoir une chance de redresser la barre, il va nous falloir avoir le courage de regarder ses manques en face. C'est ce à quoi Alana Newhouse invite ses lecteurs américains.

Un tissu d'institutions culturelles ubérisé

La vie intellectuelle et culturelle, aux Etats-Unis, était assise sur un vaste ensemble d'institutions telles que les universités, les journaux et magazines, les maisons d'édition, Hollywood. Chacune jouait sa partition, à la manière d'un big band de jazz. Il y avait à la fois de la variété et un résultat "clair et lisible". Au niveau local, des milliers d'institutions locales de socialisation secondaire structuraient la vie des gens et leur donnaient un horizon de sens partagé. Mais ces quotidiens locaux, ces magasins de centre-ville et ces clubs et associations sont à présent fermés. Parallèlement, le syndicalisme a pratiquement disparu dans le secteur privé ; à mesure que le salariat lui-même tendait à être remplacé par l'ubérisation. Ce que les Américains appellent la "gig economy".

La montée en puissance d'une idéologie culturelle unique

En outre, je cite - " à une vitesse croissante, au cours des trois dernières années, une cohorte inspirée par une idéologie unique s'est emparée de la totalité des infrastructures de la vie culturelle et intellectuelle américaine." Les institutions ont été emportées, une à une, par " une bande réduite d'élitistes ricanant, qui se sont arrogés le droit de juger et de contrôler la vie de ceux qu'ils perçoivent comme inférieurs ". Et cela se voit jusque dans l'esthétique dominante.

Jusqu'à une période récente, l'esthétique régnante aux Etats-Unis, c'était le modernisme. Une esthétique de l'âge industriel, de l'âge de la machine, de la croyance au progrès et en l'efficacité.

La révolution actuellement en marche est celle de l'âge du numérique. Elle valorise l'absence de limites et de frontières ; la vitesse ; l'accessibilité ; elle est allergique aux hiérarchies, mais délégitime toute voix discordante ; elle a remplacé la démocratie par les choix effectués par une majorité de consommateurs et de participants aux réseaux à un moment donné sur une plateforme donnée - sachant que cela peut changer d'un moment à l'autre. C'est l'esthétique de la Silicon Valley.

La "flatness", esthétique de la Silicon Valley

Alana Newhouse la définit d'un mot : flatness : pas d'aspérité, ni de frottement, monocorde et fade. C'est celle qui correspond à l'idée que se font du monde les nouveaux rois de l'époque, assis sur les milliards de dollars de l'économie numérique. C'est eux qui donnent le ton.

Leur esthétique flat, ils l'ont développée en une idéologie : celle qui fut longtemps enseignée aux employés de Facebook : "Move fast and break shit ! [Allez vite et faites péter des trucs]. C'est ce qu'ils appellent "social justice". Concrètement, elle procède d'un " transfert de pouvoir et d'argent d'une ampleur historique à une élite minuscule", qui vit, se marie et se reproduit entre soi. Mais qui respire le contentement de soi.

Ils ont en commun le discours codé de l'intersectionnalité, appris dans les universités d'élite. Et à travers leur contrôle de l'Université, de l'internet et des principaux médias, ils ont imposé un conformisme pesant à la vie intellectuelle et culturelle américaine.

Les jeunes qui veulent faire carrière savent quelles sont exactement les lignes rouges à ne pas franchir. Ils deviennent, à leur tour, les missionnaires de la nouvelle doxa politico-culturelle. Dans une atmosphère de cynique hypocrisie. Elle inspire leur nihilisme.

Du politically correct à la culture woke

A travers notre propre usage des plateformes, nous subissons tous ce conformisme sous surveillance, cette "allergie à l'excellence", au nom de l'idéologie.

Mais, poursuit Alana Newhouse, tous les sondages montrent que la grande majorité des Américains ne sont pas des idéologues. Chaque fois que la clique woke essaie d'interdire, d'annuler quelque chose, le public vote avec ses pieds dans le sens inverse.

Ainsi, lorsque HBO a décidé de retirer, pour "racisme", Autant en emporte le vent de sa liste des films disponibles en ligne, les gens se sont rués sur Amazon pour y acheter le DVD. Il devenu sa meilleure vente.

Pendant ce temps, un nombre incroyable de films et de livres bien-pensants et politiquement-corrects, sponsorisés par les nouveaux magnats, font des bides retentissants. Ces compagnies préfèrent apparemment perdre de l'argent que de risquer se faire attaquer sur Twitter par les surveillants woke.

Un décalage à investir ?

Il y une déconnection croissante entre les décideurs culturels mandatés et les attentes du public. Cela crée de formidables opportunités pour des créateurs décidés à prendre des risques, à "explorer les hérésies", afin de redevenir novateurs. Mais, pour le moment, la culture américaine qui fut si brillante, paraît éteinte et morne.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La culture woke, matrice d'un conformisme étouffant et délétère ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alana Newhouse vient de publier un texte qui détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain, paralysé par la vague dite "woke". Pour la fondatrice du magazine Tablet, la vie culturelle et sociale de son pays est en ruines. Une idéologie monochrome et normative bride désormais toute créativ[...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tablet est le meilleur site intellectuel juif et américain du Net. Et sa fondatrice, Alana Newhouse, vient de mettre en ligne un texte qui mérite le détour, tant il détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain contemporain, étouffé par la culture woke. Pour Newhouse, la vie culturelle et sociale américaines sont en ruines, minées par un phénomène qui voit l'idéologie remplacer la créativité.

Un système en ruines ?

Premier constat : alors qu'Alana Newhouse s'étonnait auprès d'amis médecins des carences du système médical aux Etats-Unis, leur réponse a été : " Il y a encore des gens très bien dans le secteur médical américain, mais en tant que système, il est en morceaux, esquinté, détruit. Les erreurs médicales sont devenues la troisième cause de mortalité dans le pays. On surmédicalise les patients. On multiplie les opérations inutiles. Les hôpitaux sont tombés sous la coupe de leurs administrateurs." Avant de l'interroger à leur tour : "Explique-nous, toi la journaliste, pourquoi le journalisme semble tombé si bas ?" Lorsque, dans un pays, tout le monde constate, dans son domaine, une évidente dégradation du niveau des performances, on est amené à se poser la question : ne serait-ce pas le système tout entier qui serait tombé en ruines, sans qu'on y ait pris garde ?

Ceci n'est pas valable que pour les Etats-Unis. Pour avoir une chance de redresser la barre, il va nous falloir avoir le courage de regarder ses manques en face. C'est ce à quoi Alana Newhouse invite ses lecteurs américains.

Un tissu d'institutions culturelles ubérisé

La vie intellectuelle et culturelle, aux Etats-Unis, était assise sur un vaste ensemble d'institutions telles que les universités, les journaux et magazines, les maisons d'édition, Hollywood. Chacune jouait sa partition, à la manière d'un big band de jazz. Il y avait à la fois de la variété et un résultat "clair et lisible". Au niveau local, des milliers d'institutions locales de socialisation secondaire structuraient la vie des gens et leur donnaient un horizon de sens partagé. Mais ces quotidiens locaux, ces magasins de centre-ville et ces clubs et associations sont à présent fermés. Parallèlement, le syndicalisme a pratiquement disparu dans le secteur privé ; à mesure que le salariat lui-même tendait à être remplacé par l'ubérisation. Ce que les Américains appellent la "gig economy".

La montée en puissance d'une idéologie culturelle unique

En outre, je cite - " à une vitesse croissante, au cours des trois dernières années, une cohorte inspirée par une idéologie unique s'est emparée de la totalité des infrastructures de la vie culturelle et intellectuelle américaine." Les institutions ont été emportées, une à une, par " une bande réduite d'élitistes ricanant, qui se sont arrogés le droit de juger et de contrôler la vie de ceux qu'ils perçoivent comme inférieurs ". Et cela se voit jusque dans l'esthétique dominante.

Jusqu'à une période récente, l'esthétique régnante aux Etats-Unis, c'était le modernisme. Une esthétique de l'âge industriel, de l'âge de la machine, de la croyance au progrès et en l'efficacité.

La révolution actuellement en marche est celle de l'âge du numérique. Elle valorise l'absence de limites et de frontières ; la vitesse ; l'accessibilité ; elle est allergique aux hiérarchies, mais délégitime toute voix discordante ; elle a remplacé la démocratie par les choix effectués par une majorité de consommateurs et de participants aux réseaux à un moment donné sur une plateforme donnée - sachant que cela peut changer d'un moment à l'autre. C'est l'esthétique de la Silicon Valley.

La "flatness", esthétique de la Silicon Valley

Alana Newhouse la définit d'un mot : flatness : pas d'aspérité, ni de frottement, monocorde et fade. C'est celle qui correspond à l'idée que se font du monde les nouveaux rois de l'époque, assis sur les milliards de dollars de l'économie numérique. C'est eux qui donnent le ton.

Leur esthétique flat, ils l'ont développée en une idéologie : celle qui fut longtemps enseignée aux employés de Facebook : "Move fast and break shit ! [Allez vite et faites péter des trucs]. C'est ce qu'ils appellent "social justice". Concrètement, elle procède d'un " transfert de pouvoir et d'argent d'une ampleur historique à une élite minuscule", qui vit, se marie et se reproduit entre soi. Mais qui respire le contentement de soi.

Ils ont en commun le discours codé de l'intersectionnalité, appris dans les universités d'élite. Et à travers leur contrôle de l'Université, de l'internet et des principaux médias, ils ont imposé un conformisme pesant à la vie intellectuelle et culturelle américaine.

Les jeunes qui veulent faire carrière savent quelles sont exactement les lignes rouges à ne pas franchir. Ils deviennent, à leur tour, les missionnaires de la nouvelle doxa politico-culturelle. Dans une atmosphère de cynique hypocrisie. Elle inspire leur nihilisme.

Du politically correct à la culture woke

A travers notre propre usage des plateformes, nous subissons tous ce conformisme sous surveillance, cette "allergie à l'excellence", au nom de l'idéologie.

Mais, poursuit Alana Newhouse, tous les sondages montrent que la grande majorité des Américains ne sont pas des idéologues. Chaque fois que la clique woke essaie d'interdire, d'annuler quelque chose, le public vote avec ses pieds dans le sens inverse.

Ainsi, lorsque HBO a décidé de retirer, pour "racisme", Autant en emporte le vent de sa liste des films disponibles en ligne, les gens se sont rués sur Amazon pour y acheter le DVD. Il devenu sa meilleure vente.

Pendant ce temps, un nombre incroyable de films et de livres bien-pensants et politiquement-corrects, sponsorisés par les nouveaux magnats, font des bides retentissants. Ces compagnies préfèrent apparemment perdre de l'argent que de risquer se faire attaquer sur Twitter par les surveillants woke.

Un décalage à investir ?

Il y une déconnection croissante entre les décideurs culturels mandatés et les attentes du public. Cela crée de formidables opportunités pour des créateurs décidés à prendre des risques, à "explorer les hérésies", afin de redevenir novateurs. Mais, pour le moment, la culture américaine qui fut si brillante, paraît éteinte et morne.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La culture woke, matrice d'un conformisme étouffant et délétère ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alana Newhouse vient de publier un texte qui détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain, paralysé par la vague dite "woke". Pour la fondatrice du magazine Tablet, la vie culturelle et sociale de son pays est en ruines. Une idéologie monochrome et normative bride désormais toute créativ[...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tablet est le meilleur site intellectuel juif et américain du Net. Et sa fondatrice, Alana Newhouse, vient de mettre en ligne un texte qui mérite le détour, tant il détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain contemporain, étouffé par la culture woke. Pour Newhouse, la vie culturelle et sociale américaines sont en ruines, minées par un phénomène qui voit l'idéologie remplacer la créativité.

Un système en ruines ?

Premier constat : alors qu'Alana Newhouse s'étonnait auprès d'amis médecins des carences du système médical aux Etats-Unis, leur réponse a été : " Il y a encore des gens très bien dans le secteur médical américain, mais en tant que système, il est en morceaux, esquinté, détruit. Les erreurs médicales sont devenues la troisième cause de mortalité dans le pays. On surmédicalise les patients. On multiplie les opérations inutiles. Les hôpitaux sont tombés sous la coupe de leurs administrateurs." Avant de l'interroger à leur tour : "Explique-nous, toi la journaliste, pourquoi le journalisme semble tombé si bas ?" Lorsque, dans un pays, tout le monde constate, dans son domaine, une évidente dégradation du niveau des performances, on est amené à se poser la question : ne serait-ce pas le système tout entier qui serait tombé en ruines, sans qu'on y ait pris garde ?

Ceci n'est pas valable que pour les Etats-Unis. Pour avoir une chance de redresser la barre, il va nous falloir avoir le courage de regarder ses manques en face. C'est ce à quoi Alana Newhouse invite ses lecteurs américains.

Un tissu d'institutions culturelles ubérisé

La vie intellectuelle et culturelle, aux Etats-Unis, était assise sur un vaste ensemble d'institutions telles que les universités, les journaux et magazines, les maisons d'édition, Hollywood. Chacune jouait sa partition, à la manière d'un big band de jazz. Il y avait à la fois de la variété et un résultat "clair et lisible". Au niveau local, des milliers d'institutions locales de socialisation secondaire structuraient la vie des gens et leur donnaient un horizon de sens partagé. Mais ces quotidiens locaux, ces magasins de centre-ville et ces clubs et associations sont à présent fermés. Parallèlement, le syndicalisme a pratiquement disparu dans le secteur privé ; à mesure que le salariat lui-même tendait à être remplacé par l'ubérisation. Ce que les Américains appellent la "gig economy".

La montée en puissance d'une idéologie culturelle unique

En outre, je cite - " à une vitesse croissante, au cours des trois dernières années, une cohorte inspirée par une idéologie unique s'est emparée de la totalité des infrastructures de la vie culturelle et intellectuelle américaine." Les institutions ont été emportées, une à une, par " une bande réduite d'élitistes ricanant, qui se sont arrogés le droit de juger et de contrôler la vie de ceux qu'ils perçoivent comme inférieurs ". Et cela se voit jusque dans l'esthétique dominante.

Jusqu'à une période récente, l'esthétique régnante aux Etats-Unis, c'était le modernisme. Une esthétique de l'âge industriel, de l'âge de la machine, de la croyance au progrès et en l'efficacité.

La révolution actuellement en marche est celle de l'âge du numérique. Elle valorise l'absence de limites et de frontières ; la vitesse ; l'accessibilité ; elle est allergique aux hiérarchies, mais délégitime toute voix discordante ; elle a remplacé la démocratie par les choix effectués par une majorité de consommateurs et de participants aux réseaux à un moment donné sur une plateforme donnée - sachant que cela peut changer d'un moment à l'autre. C'est l'esthétique de la Silicon Valley.

La "flatness", esthétique de la Silicon Valley

Alana Newhouse la définit d'un mot : flatness : pas d'aspérité, ni de frottement, monocorde et fade. C'est celle qui correspond à l'idée que se font du monde les nouveaux rois de l'époque, assis sur les milliards de dollars de l'économie numérique. C'est eux qui donnent le ton.

Leur esthétique flat, ils l'ont développée en une idéologie : celle qui fut longtemps enseignée aux employés de Facebook : "Move fast and break shit ! [Allez vite et faites péter des trucs]. C'est ce qu'ils appellent "social justice". Concrètement, elle procède d'un " transfert de pouvoir et d'argent d'une ampleur historique à une élite minuscule", qui vit, se marie et se reproduit entre soi. Mais qui respire le contentement de soi.

Ils ont en commun le discours codé de l'intersectionnalité, appris dans les universités d'élite. Et à travers leur contrôle de l'Université, de l'internet et des principaux médias, ils ont imposé un conformisme pesant à la vie intellectuelle et culturelle américaine.

Les jeunes qui veulent faire carrière savent quelles sont exactement les lignes rouges à ne pas franchir. Ils deviennent, à leur tour, les missionnaires de la nouvelle doxa politico-culturelle. Dans une atmosphère de cynique hypocrisie. Elle inspire leur nihilisme.

Du politically correct à la culture woke

A travers notre propre usage des plateformes, nous subissons tous ce conformisme sous surveillance, cette "allergie à l'excellence", au nom de l'idéologie.

Mais, poursuit Alana Newhouse, tous les sondages montrent que la grande majorité des Américains ne sont pas des idéologues. Chaque fois que la clique woke essaie d'interdire, d'annuler quelque chose, le public vote avec ses pieds dans le sens inverse.

Ainsi, lorsque HBO a décidé de retirer, pour "racisme", Autant en emporte le vent de sa liste des films disponibles en ligne, les gens se sont rués sur Amazon pour y acheter le DVD. Il devenu sa meilleure vente.

Pendant ce temps, un nombre incroyable de films et de livres bien-pensants et politiquement-corrects, sponsorisés par les nouveaux magnats, font des bides retentissants. Ces compagnies préfèrent apparemment perdre de l'argent que de risquer se faire attaquer sur Twitter par les surveillants woke.

Un décalage à investir ?

Il y une déconnection croissante entre les décideurs culturels mandatés et les attentes du public. Cela crée de formidables opportunités pour des créateurs décidés à prendre des risques, à "explorer les hérésies", afin de redevenir novateurs. Mais, pour le moment, la culture américaine qui fut si brillante, paraît éteinte et morne.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La culture woke, matrice d'un conformisme étouffant et délétère ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alana Newhouse vient de publier un texte qui détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain, paralysé par la vague dite "woke". Pour la fondatrice du magazine Tablet, la vie culturelle et sociale de son pays est en ruines. Une idéologie monochrome et normative bride désormais toute créativ[...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tablet est le meilleur site intellectuel juif et américain du Net. Et sa fondatrice, Alana Newhouse, vient de mettre en ligne un texte qui mérite le détour, tant il détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain contemporain, étouffé par la culture woke. Pour Newhouse, la vie culturelle et sociale américaines sont en ruines, minées par un phénomène qui voit l'idéologie remplacer la créativité.

Un système en ruines ?

Premier constat : alors qu'Alana Newhouse s'étonnait auprès d'amis médecins des carences du système médical aux Etats-Unis, leur réponse a été : " Il y a encore des gens très bien dans le secteur médical américain, mais en tant que système, il est en morceaux, esquinté, détruit. Les erreurs médicales sont devenues la troisième cause de mortalité dans le pays. On surmédicalise les patients. On multiplie les opérations inutiles. Les hôpitaux sont tombés sous la coupe de leurs administrateurs." Avant de l'interroger à leur tour : "Explique-nous, toi la journaliste, pourquoi le journalisme semble tombé si bas ?" Lorsque, dans un pays, tout le monde constate, dans son domaine, une évidente dégradation du niveau des performances, on est amené à se poser la question : ne serait-ce pas le système tout entier qui serait tombé en ruines, sans qu'on y ait pris garde ?

Ceci n'est pas valable que pour les Etats-Unis. Pour avoir une chance de redresser la barre, il va nous falloir avoir le courage de regarder ses manques en face. C'est ce à quoi Alana Newhouse invite ses lecteurs américains.

Un tissu d'institutions culturelles ubérisé

La vie intellectuelle et culturelle, aux Etats-Unis, était assise sur un vaste ensemble d'institutions telles que les universités, les journaux et magazines, les maisons d'édition, Hollywood. Chacune jouait sa partition, à la manière d'un big band de jazz. Il y avait à la fois de la variété et un résultat "clair et lisible". Au niveau local, des milliers d'institutions locales de socialisation secondaire structuraient la vie des gens et leur donnaient un horizon de sens partagé. Mais ces quotidiens locaux, ces magasins de centre-ville et ces clubs et associations sont à présent fermés. Parallèlement, le syndicalisme a pratiquement disparu dans le secteur privé ; à mesure que le salariat lui-même tendait à être remplacé par l'ubérisation. Ce que les Américains appellent la "gig economy".

La montée en puissance d'une idéologie culturelle unique

En outre, je cite - " à une vitesse croissante, au cours des trois dernières années, une cohorte inspirée par une idéologie unique s'est emparée de la totalité des infrastructures de la vie culturelle et intellectuelle américaine." Les institutions ont été emportées, une à une, par " une bande réduite d'élitistes ricanant, qui se sont arrogés le droit de juger et de contrôler la vie de ceux qu'ils perçoivent comme inférieurs ". Et cela se voit jusque dans l'esthétique dominante.

Jusqu'à une période récente, l'esthétique régnante aux Etats-Unis, c'était le modernisme. Une esthétique de l'âge industriel, de l'âge de la machine, de la croyance au progrès et en l'efficacité.

La révolution actuellement en marche est celle de l'âge du numérique. Elle valorise l'absence de limites et de frontières ; la vitesse ; l'accessibilité ; elle est allergique aux hiérarchies, mais délégitime toute voix discordante ; elle a remplacé la démocratie par les choix effectués par une majorité de consommateurs et de participants aux réseaux à un moment donné sur une plateforme donnée - sachant que cela peut changer d'un moment à l'autre. C'est l'esthétique de la Silicon Valley.

La "flatness", esthétique de la Silicon Valley

Alana Newhouse la définit d'un mot : flatness : pas d'aspérité, ni de frottement, monocorde et fade. C'est celle qui correspond à l'idée que se font du monde les nouveaux rois de l'époque, assis sur les milliards de dollars de l'économie numérique. C'est eux qui donnent le ton.

Leur esthétique flat, ils l'ont développée en une idéologie : celle qui fut longtemps enseignée aux employés de Facebook : "Move fast and break shit ! [Allez vite et faites péter des trucs]. C'est ce qu'ils appellent "social justice". Concrètement, elle procède d'un " transfert de pouvoir et d'argent d'une ampleur historique à une élite minuscule", qui vit, se marie et se reproduit entre soi. Mais qui respire le contentement de soi.

Ils ont en commun le discours codé de l'intersectionnalité, appris dans les universités d'élite. Et à travers leur contrôle de l'Université, de l'internet et des principaux médias, ils ont imposé un conformisme pesant à la vie intellectuelle et culturelle américaine.

Les jeunes qui veulent faire carrière savent quelles sont exactement les lignes rouges à ne pas franchir. Ils deviennent, à leur tour, les missionnaires de la nouvelle doxa politico-culturelle. Dans une atmosphère de cynique hypocrisie. Elle inspire leur nihilisme.

Du politically correct à la culture woke

A travers notre propre usage des plateformes, nous subissons tous ce conformisme sous surveillance, cette "allergie à l'excellence", au nom de l'idéologie.

Mais, poursuit Alana Newhouse, tous les sondages montrent que la grande majorité des Américains ne sont pas des idéologues. Chaque fois que la clique woke essaie d'interdire, d'annuler quelque chose, le public vote avec ses pieds dans le sens inverse.

Ainsi, lorsque HBO a décidé de retirer, pour "racisme", Autant en emporte le vent de sa liste des films disponibles en ligne, les gens se sont rués sur Amazon pour y acheter le DVD. Il devenu sa meilleure vente.

Pendant ce temps, un nombre incroyable de films et de livres bien-pensants et politiquement-corrects, sponsorisés par les nouveaux magnats, font des bides retentissants. Ces compagnies préfèrent apparemment perdre de l'argent que de risquer se faire attaquer sur Twitter par les surveillants woke.

Un décalage à investir ?

Il y une déconnection croissante entre les décideurs culturels mandatés et les attentes du public. Cela crée de formidables opportunités pour des créateurs décidés à prendre des risques, à "explorer les hérésies", afin de redevenir novateurs. Mais, pour le moment, la culture américaine qui fut si brillante, paraît éteinte et morne.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La culture woke, matrice d'un conformisme étouffant et délétère ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alana Newhouse vient de publier un texte qui détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain, paralysé par la vague dite "woke". Pour la fondatrice du magazine Tablet, la vie culturelle et sociale de son pays est en ruines. Une idéologie monochrome et normative bride désormais toute créativ[...]

# data[].attributes.headline
What’s in a name--can a name fully define who you are?

# data[].attributes.subject
What’s in a name--can a name fully define who you are?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
July 7, 2020 The below letter will be appearing in the Letters section of the magazine's October issue. We welcome responses at letters@harpers.org Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial. Powerful protests for racial and social justice are leading to overdue demands for police reform, along with wider calls for greater equality and [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
Censure de  l´art ou art de la censure ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Censure de  l´art ou art de la censure ?

# data[].attributes.headline
British impérialisme and forced acculturation in African Colonies

# data[].attributes.subject
British impérialisme and forced acculturation in African Colonies

# data[].attributes.headline
Sous quels aspects la Crise de 29 se voit-elle reflétée dans l'art du cinéma Anglosaxon?

# data[].attributes.subject
Sous quels aspects la Crise de 29 se voit-elle reflétée dans l'art du cinéma Anglosaxon?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President Barack Obama delivers stirring speech in Parliament

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The London Economic | Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute | News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The London Economic | Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute | News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The London Economic | Anti-woke brigade up in arms over Snow White 'kissing without consent' dispute | News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Let me start by simply saying: if you spend a day at Walt Disney World or Disneyland, and you come out offended by an attraction as opposed to giddy like a child on Christmas morning, you've got problems.

Such is the case of two journalists from the San Francisco Gate newspaper in California. Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif., opened for the first time in over a year at the end of April. Two women, a managing editor of the publication and a contributor whose beat is actually Disneyland, attended and wrote a review of a much hyped "revamped" attraction, "Snow White's Enchanted Wish." (Someone has Disneyland as their beat? I want that beat. I wouldn't live in California for it, or even if someone offered me a million dollars to do so, but maybe I can get that gig at the park in Orlando, Florida?)

Spoiler alert! I'm going to spill the beans about part of the Snow White tale, for the one singular person in the country that doesn't know it, and is old enough to know how to read this: Snow White has a spell cast upon her by the Evil Queen, and is awoken from her enchantment by a kiss from the Prince. ANAHEIM! WE HAVE A PROBLEM!
"The new grand finale of Snow White's Enchanted Wish is the moment when the Prince finds Snow White asleep under the Evil Queen's spell and gives her 'true love's kiss' to release her from the enchantment. A kiss he gives to her without her consent, while she's asleep, which cannot possibly be true love if only one person knows it's happening." - Disneyland's new Snow White ride adds magic, but also a new problem, by Katie Dowd, Julie Tremaine, SFGATE
I know you just read that three times before continuing to read on. No, it's not a joke or sarcasm or a mockery of the woke generation, which it should be. It's sincere. It continues: "Haven't we already agreed that consent in early Disney movies is a major issue? That teaching kids that kissing, when it hasn't been established if both parties are willing to engage, is not OK? It's hard to understand why the Disneyland of 2021 would choose to add a scene with such old-fashioned ideas of what a man is allowed to do to a woman."

Woke ladies, let me first inform you of something: Had the Prince not kissed her, she would be dead. You're so woke, you don't want Snow White to awaken. I thought you've all been trying to wake the rest of us up these past few years. What do you have against poor, young, Snow White that she can't join us among the (a)woken?

My husband deserves credit for his spot-on analysis of what's going on here and why we are seeing so many examples of this sheer nonsense: We've got an entire sector of our society that are robots. A robot is just programmed. No emotion. There is no "Number 5 Alive!" (I hope you get the reference, if not search it and watch a fun film!) We have a part of a generation that is just like a computer program. Computers are programmed or trained to "think" one way without any analysis, common sense or judgment. "Man kiss woman, woman asleep. BAD!" The thought process here is just that rudimentary and it is exactly how we are telling people they should think and react.

This programming of society by those who claim to be more aware and understanding and informed, is creating the exact opposite result and under-developing people's individual abilities to use good judgment and sensibleness when analyzing a situation. That's a fancy way to say: you guys are making our country stupid.

They're also killing our art, which is exactly what a fairy tale is and they're doing it by force. These "woke folk" publicly shame companies along with regular people who don't agree with them. Those of us that don't agree with this absolute silliness are the majority and are actually using our human intellect to examine what we see, hear and read, without even thinking too hard about it. "Prince kisses Snow White to wake her from a spell and they live happily ever after. YAY!" Happy Ending. That is literally the only proper analysis for a fairy tale such as this.

Which the authors of the "review" do mention with a cautionary note: "That final scene is beautifully executed - as long as you're watching it as a fairy tale, not a life lesson." They had to put that in writing? That Snow White is a fairy tale, not something to expect in real life? So, I can eat an apple without fear of an evil witch poisoning it? I can't cook dinner for seven dwarfs every night? That's a bummer, because I love to cook and Dopey seems to really like to eat. I've always fantasized that I can make Grumpy, happy, if I have the chance to give him some of my peach cheese cake. Is this not true? Just a "fairy tale." Tragic.

I would like to put in writing, just in case the writers are wrong about he whole "fairy tale" thing, that if ever I am poisoned by an evil queen, and a kiss from my "true love" will awaken me, I hereby grant my husband official consent, so I don't die in perpetual slumber with seven dwarfs mourning for my meals. The End.
Alicia Preston is a former political consultant and member of the media. She's a native of Hampton Beach where she lives with her family and three poodles. The views expressed are those of the writer. Write to her at PrestonPerspective@gmail.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Preston: 'Woke' culture challenging Disney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Let me start by simply saying: if you spend a day at Walt Disney World or Disneyland, and you come out offended by an attraction as opposed to giddy like a child on Christmas morning, you've got problems. Such is the case of two journalists from the San Francisco Gate newspaper in California.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When Winston Churchill said that jaw-jaw was better than war-war, he was expressing an elementary truth about diplomacy: that talking is better than fighting. Communication between the parties to a conflict goes back to the distant origins of history; heralds are mentioned in the Iliad, and one of them, Stentor by name, was said by Homer to have a 'voice as powerful as fifty voices of other men'. It seems, however, this that this strength lay in volume rather than in his powers of persuasion.

The Greeks and Trojans communicated with each other in Greek in the Iliad, but Homer was using a common literary device of later ages. In fact, it seems certain that the two sides in the real Trojan War spoke different languages, and it goes without saying that language skill is an essential ability for any successful diplomat. Lingua francas have always been known and used, usually being the language of the dominant power. Greek and Latin were the languages of the classical empires, with Greek surviving as the language of official correspondence in Rome and Byzantium.

Latin survives in Europe to this day as the language of the Roman Catholic Church but the rise of vernacular languages in the Middle Ages fragmented linguistic unity, even though Newton wrote his Principia in Latin as late as 1687. English and French in particular increased their influence through their empires and French became the common language of much of educated Europe.

British influence in Europe remained great, but during the 20th century it was the rise in US power that was to boost the international status of English worldwide through American cultural and financial influence, soft power to use Joseph Nye's name for such action. As a result, the use of English in international affairs has developed in two separate fields: Europe and theCommonwealth use British English, or slight variations of it, while the Americas and much of Asia use the American version of the language. But whichever form is used there can be no doubt that English is an essential language for anyone working in diplomacy or international organisations.

What is English for diplomacy? It is essentially the English language used in a formal way, as is the case with much use of the language by native speakers. Contractions (I'm, we'd, they'll etc.) are not used in formal writing, though they are correctly used I speech in all hut the most extremely formal usage. There are some mistakes that Spanish-speakers make, even those who have a very respectable command of the language, and false friends lurk to trap the unwary. Conditional verb forms pose a problem though they are in fact much easier to explain and understand than many people, including many teachers, realise. A feature of formal written English that students must master is inversion of verb and subject following adverbs: Never had I experienced such difficulty. And finally (does it really need saying?) Google and other mechanical means can produce results that are nothing short of disastrous.

It is not only apparently friendly vocabulary that can be false. Idioms can be especially dangerous as they do not always transfer literally from one language culture to another. Many years ago, when I was on the board of a European youth organisation, our chairman was retiring after making a great contribution to its development. The Finn who made the thank-you speech said that in his years in the organisation he had 'played the part of a brick'. The intention was to use a brick as a metaphor of construction, but to English ears a brick is a solid, heavy object that does nothing, hurts if you drop it on your foot, and sinks in water! Then there is the story of the diplomat making a speech at a formal dinner. His speech wouldn't be long he said because ... well because he wanted to quote the English proverb 'Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise,' but unfortunately what he said was 'I quote your English saying: Early to bed and up with the cock.' Well, it is true that cock is the Spanish gallo. But it is also true that it is a slang word for the penis!

There is one particular example that I could quote that is relevant to Spanish-speakers:

¡Qué palo! Don't say What a stick! in English. These things can't be translated literally and they sound ridiculous. You are taking my hair! is ridiculous in English, just as ¡Te estoy tirando de la pierna! sounds silly in Spanish for the English equivalent: I'm pulling your leg. (Great English Mistakes made by Spanish-speakers by Peter Harvey)

Further language advice for diplomats can be found in A Dictionary of Diplomacy by G. R. Berridge and Alan James, published by Palgrave Macmillan.

English is an international language in its own right. It is the medium of communication between people who speak other languages but have English in common. In such circumstances it is hardly surprising that a form of English has developed that is used in international organisations but is not quite how native speakers would use it. In some cases it has been simplified: phrasal verbs, which are a basic part of native English usage, are rarely found - and this is not surprising given the complexity of their use. Words from other languages are sometimes used in English, though here a problem can arise. In English communitarian refers to the organisation of society into small self-governing communities. It does not correspond to the French communautaire though sometimes it is mistakenly used in that way. It is well known that English actual does not correspond to its equivalent form in other European languages, but actualité is sometimes used in English with its French meaning.

International English may be free of some of the subtleties that native speakers of the language include in their speech and writing, but these speakers will use their own language as they naturally do. That means that the cultural basis that underlies their choice of language will have full expression. In English that means first and foremost Shakespeare; not only was he a brilliant dramatist, but he was writing at an extremely fertile time in the development of the language. He contributed many expressions that are now in common everyday use, so much so in fact that people who use expressions such as full circle or what's done is done are often not aware that they are quoting from Shakespeare's work. The same is true of the Bible, not because people are especially religious but because the translation of the Bible that was published in 1611 (while Shakespeare was still alive) is regarded as a work of English literature and has similarly contributed many idioms to the language such as an eye for an eye and turning the other cheek. It was in the 1960s that the first year ever passed with no British serviceman being killed in action, and few if any such years have been known since then. Not surprisingly, the country's military tradition, along with its merchant navy and empire, has influenced the language from battening down the hatches to turning a blind eye.

English has no Academy or other authority to set standards for usage. For that reason there is a certain degree of variation in the way that English is used, though this is of very slight significance in the context of the language as a whole. Some points that might be of interest to people using English in an international setting are these:

* Judgement and judgment are both valid spellings. Some courts use one and some use the other.
* Words such as standardise, realise etc. can be written as standardize, realize. The reasons for this are complex and need not concern us here. Suffice it to say that, contrary to popular belief, it is not a British/American difference. True, the form with z is standard in the USA but both are used in British English. Publishers and writers decide on a style, with consistency being the most important factor. There are some words that must always be spelt with s. They are advertise, advise, apprise, arise, chastise, circumcise, comprise, compromise, demise, despise, devise, dis(en)franchise, disguise, enfranchise, enterprise, excise, exercise, expertise, franchise, improvise, incise, merchandise, premise, prise (force open), promise, reprise, revise, supervise, surmise, surprise, televise. International bodies have their own way of spelling their names, e.g. the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the International Labour Organization (ILO)
* Some verbs have alternative forms, for example burnt and burned, learnt and learned. There is no significant difference between but once again, consistency in style should be observed.
* In legal use, in contracts and treaties for example, the auxiliary verb shall is used with a third-person subject. This use is perhaps not as common as it used to be in everyday legal contexts but it will certainly be found. It is used to imply a certain degree of compulsion or forded rather than will as simple prediction of the future. Here is an example from theVienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (my emphasis):
33. Interpretation of treaties authenticated in two or more languages
1. When a treaty has been authenticated in two or more languages, the text is equally authoritative in each language, unless the treaty provides or the parties agree that, in case of divergence, a particular text shall prevail.
33. Interpretación de tratados autenticados en dos o más idiomas.
1. Cuando un tratado haya sido autenticado en dos o más idiomas, el texto dará igualmente fe en cada idioma, a menos que el tratado disponga o las partes convengan que en caso de discrepancia prevalecerá uno de los textos.
In such cases Spanish uses the future tense.
* Finally, it is not by chance that I chose that Convention as an example. One of the most intractable problems in the Middle East lies in the interpretation to be given to UN Resolution 242, where a tiny difference between the English and French versions has bedevilled negotiations for many years.

Where English has 'from occupied territories', French has 'des territoires occupés'. The English version implies that not all the occupied territories are to be evacuated, while the French seems to imply that such is the intention. Wikipedia quotes the varying interpretations by the people involved. For example, British Foreign Secretary George Brown said:

It calls for 'withdrawal of Israeli forces from territories occupied during the recent conflict.' It does not call for Israeli withdrawal from 'the' territories recently occupied, nor does it use the word 'all'. It would have been impossible to get the resolution through if either of these words had been included, but it does set out the lines on which negotiations for a settlement must take place.

For the USA Secretary of State Dean Rusk said:

There was much bickering over whether that resolution should say from 'the' territories or from 'all' territories. In the French version, which is equally authentic, it says withdrawal de territory (sic), with de meaning 'the'. We wanted that to be left a little vague and subject to future negotiation ... we never contemplated any significant grant of territory to Israel as a result of the June 1967 war. On that point we and the Israelis to this day remain sharply divided. This situation could lead to real trouble in the future.

This is certainly not the occasion to enter into the details of that conflict, but it is worth noting that Brown and Rusk seem to have disagreed as to the intention of the wording. Language is about communication, and communication is about clear understanding. Only in that way can jaw-jaw prevail over war-war - as Rusk admits in his final words quoted here.

Copyright © Peter Harvey 2011. All rights reserved.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Diplomacy and the English language | Diplotaxis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When Winston Churchill said that jaw-jaw was better than war-war , he was expressing an elementary truth about diplomacy: that talking is better than fighting. Communication between the parties to a conflict goes back to the distant origins of history; heralds are mentioned in the Iliad, and one of them, Stentor by name, was said by Homer to have a 'voice as powerful as fifty voices of other men'.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LOS ANGELES - An estimated 30,000 people converged in West Hollywood on Sunday to protest systemic racism and police brutality and to shine light on the specific needs of Black LGBTQ people. The event - which took place just ahead of the 50th anniversary of L.A.'s first pride event, originally called the Christopher Street West Parade - started out as a Black Lives Matter solidarity march, but it ultimately showed the divisions between two overlapping civil rights movements.

The event's initial organizers found themselves the recipients of backlash when they announced their plans in early June: Christopher Street West, or CSW, the historic, mostly white-led organization that typically produces the annual LA Pride Festival and Parade, never reached out to coordinate with Black Lives Matter activists about the march. In addition, it hired an event organizer who applied for a police permit for the parade - a move seen as offensive by many Black activists in the midst of anti-brutality protests.

For many people at the march Sunday, the backlash highlighted how the growing Black Lives Matter movement had the power to force ostensibly progressive LGBTQ organizations to grapple with blind spots and long-unaddressed histories of exclusion.

CSW canceled its solidarity march shortly after the backlash, and Gerald Garth, one of the few Black board members at CSW, formed a new council with a group of Black LGBTQ leaders. Together, they announced a new march, dubbed the "All Black Lives Matter" protest, without CSW's involvement. The result was Sunday's all-day event, featuring a march starting on Hollywood Boulevard and ending in West Hollywood, as well as lively performances, art and nonstop dancing.
"Putting Protest Back in Pride" originally aired on the Weekend Report on Quibi. Watch the full video here.
"A big part of the conversations that I had to have often was that even though things were well-intended, that didn't make it any less wrong or impactful," Garth told NBC News. "And plus, too, through the lens of CSW being this legendary white agency proposing this Black effort, [the] community really received it as CSW, you know, aiming to co-opt or, you know, capitalize."

Luckie Fuller, an artist and trans activist, said a formal police presence "would've kept people from coming out here."

"It would've hindered a lot of our voices, and it would've dampened our voices," Fuller said.

Obtaining a police permit for its annual event, however, is part of the 50-year history of L.A.'s annual pride celebration. While New York held the very first pride march on June 28, 1970, later that same day, L.A. held the " world's first permitted parade advocating for gay rights," a fact Christopher Street West still highlights on its website to this day.

Miss Shalae, a Beyoncé impersonator who performed at the march, said that when she first moved to Los Angeles, she couldn't persuade white-owned LGBTQ bars and clubs to book her for performances. She didn't have faith that CSW would learn from mistakes without a change in leadership.

"They're not giving us a seat at the table, which I feel like is super important. How can you know what we want without asking us what we want?" Miss Shalae said. "And it is definitely a time for that to change, absolutely."

CSW's executive director, Madonna Cacciatore, said it is committed to making sure that doesn't happen again. "And we're having the hard conversations now, to be honest with you," she said. "Because there's been a history, not only with our organization, but, you know, everybody's being asked to re-examine themselves and to look at ourselves through a different lens. We have been, you know, we always try to do the right thing. We sometimes don't do it well."

For some, the new march and the organization's apology were too little too late.

Ashlee Marie Preston, a Black trans writer and former CSW board member, decided she wouldn't attend. "What made me so frustrated about all of this is that I have direct relationships with people on the board," Preston said. "It's this idea that saviorism is solidarity. ... When we say Black Lives Matter, we need to also emphasize that Black leadership matters and that we have to trust that leadership."

Still, many in the crowd hoped that CSW and other similar organizations would learn from this year's mistakes. Brandon Anthony, an event producer, called CSW the "guinea pig" for the transformations Black LGBTQ activists want to see more broadly.

"Our target is not just CSW and LA Pride," he said. "We're going to challenge all nonprofits and corporations. ... Change your infrastructure and re-examine how Black lives are being treated."

CORRECTION (June 23, 2020, 2:31 p.m. ET): An earlier version of this article included a factually incorrect quote about the makeup of the board of Christopher Street West. One member of the board identifies as a Black trans woman. The quote from Miss Shalae that there are no Black trans women on the board has been removed.
Follow NBC Out on Twitter, Facebook & Instagram

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Black Lives Matter forces LGBTQ organization to face its history of racial exclusion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LOS ANGELES - An estimated 30,000 people converged in West Hollywood on Sunday to protest systemic racism and police brutality and to shine light on the specific needs of Black LGBTQ people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New hashtags are circulating in the #Black Lives Matter movement to include Black lives that have been historically marginalized within the community: #Black LGBTQ Lives Matter.

"I hope when y'all are out here screaming 'Black Lives Matter' that you are talking about ALL black lives, and by all black lives, I mean black women, black men, gay black women, gay black men, black trans men, black trans women, etc.," tweeted @Cuyler_Nichole on June 24. "Because I'm sure there are people out here screaming black lives matter but are discriminating our black brothers and sisters of the LGBTQ+ community ... they matter too."

Historically, LGBTQ+ members of the Black community have experienced ostracization, bullying, isolation and violence, according to studies. LGBTQ youth of color and transgender teenagers report the highest levels of rejection and isolation, in a poll of 12,000 respondents ages 13 to 17. The 2017 study drew from all 50 states and Washington, D.C.

"Only 11% of youth of color surveyed believe their racial or ethnic group is regarded positively in the U.S," according to the 2017 LGBTQ Teen Survey, the largest of its kind, conducted by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) Foundation and the University of Connecticut.

"A black gay person who is a sexual conundrum to society is already long before the question of sexuality comes into it, menace and marked because he's black or she's black," said James Baldwin, an gay African American novelist, on being black and gay in James Baldwin: The Last Interview.

"The sexual question comes after the question of color; it's simply one more aspect of the danger in which all black people live," he said.
Higher rates of bias
While members of the LGBTQ+ community experience higher rates of bias, violence and suicide, Black LGBTQ+ members experience even higher incidence, according to the U.S. Transgender Survey (USTS).

USTS respondents were more than twice as likely as the U.S. population to be living in poverty. But people of color -- including Latino/a (43 percent), American Indian (41 percent), multiracial (40 percent) and Black (38 percent) -- were more than three times as likely as the U.S. population (12 percent) to be living in poverty, the report said.

In 2016, when the survey was taken, unemployment among transgender people of color (20 percent) was four times higher than the U.S. unemployment rate (5 percent).

Human Rights Watch reports that most transgender deaths in 2018 were Black transgender.

A national survey by Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) found 75 percent of transgender youth feel unsafe at school. Their grade-point averages were significantly lower, they were more likely to miss school out of fear and less likely to continue their education.

"RIP to Nigel Shelby. At 15 he took his own life due to constant horrific bullying for being gay," hip-hop artist @Drebae tweeted on June 18. "His school IGNORED his cries for help. He deserved to be loved & appreciated. When you say 'Black Lives Matter' don't forget the LGBT ones."

Drebae also cited the stabbing death of Kirvan Fortuin in Cape Town, South Africa.

"Kirvan Fortuin was a 28 year old professional dancer & activist. His life was taken by a 14 year old girl who stabbed him for being gay. Homophobia is TAUGHT. ALL 'Black Lives Matter' Stop poisoning your children with hateful ideals because lives are LOST," Drebae tweeted.
'Appalling at best'
On June 4, Pose actor Billy Porter posted a video to his Instagram account addressing the Black Lives Matter protests, the Black LGBTQ+ community, and the attack on a Black transgender woman named Iyanna Dior.

"The black community's relationship with the LGBTQ+ community is appalling at best and eerily similar to that of white supremacists versus black folk," Porter wrote.

"Hear me, black people, and hear me well. I'm calling you out right here and right now. You cannot expect our demands of equality to be met with any real legislative policy and change when y'all turn around and inflict the same kind of hate and oppression on us," Porter said in the video captioned, "This is my message to America."

"The tragic reality here is that black trans, as well as gender nonconforming, women and men are being killed in the United States by cis black men to such a degree that it is nearly the worst emergency for trans women on the planet," he added.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BLM Turns Inward to Ask About LGBTQ Bias

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New hashtags are circulating in the #Black Lives Matter movement to include Black lives that have been historically marginalized within the community: #Black LGBTQ Lives Matter. "I hope when y'all are out here screaming 'Black Lives Matter' that you are talking about ALL black lives, and by all black lives, I mean black women, black men, gay black women, gay black men, black trans men, black trans women, etc.," tweeted @Cuyler_Nichole on June 24.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Deep Connections Between Pride and Black Lives Matter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 27, 1969, a police raid of the Stonewall Inn in New York City touched off a series of protests and militant actions that would come to be called the Stonewall Riots.The uprising was sparked by constant police harassment and repression of the LGBTQ community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An Invitation To My LGBTQ Family

Photo by author from the Phoenix Protests - 06.20

Yes, it's pride month, and we're usually glittered up and celebrating right about now.

Dancing and cheering mediocre parade floats and drinking sticky, warm overpriced drinks while making valid complaints about the commodification of a party we still badly want to attend.

Why? Because it's one of the few places we can be fully ourselves.

We're not doing that this year. For obvious reasons.

But that doesn't mean there isn't a place for us to be.

To come together in solidarity, in commitment.

In all of our fierceness and insistence on showing up as the all of us.

Weare ready for this.

Because here's the thing I know about marginalization.

It means you understand othering.

It means that you, for some reason, at some point, have been set outside of the majority and judged or punished or ostracized for injured because of who you are.

You know what it is to be hated. To be voted against. To scan a room to ensure your safety.

If you haven't experienced it directly in your lived experience, you embody the trauma of generations of history that became your own the moment you came out, even if only to yourself. Even if you don't fully realize it.

The experience of othering prepares you for allyship, if you let it.

If you insist on it.

It primes you to really grab intersectionality by the balls and to see every single place where the lines cross in the most beautifully, brilliantly, painfully undeniable way.

The impacts of marginalization cannot be siloed and discussed and dismantled any more than they are experienced in isolation.

Marginalization does not separate.

It doesn't break itself down into neat and tidy compartments inside of bodies or lived experiences.

Marginalization stacks.

One identity on top of the other.

The same way privilege does.
Woman
--Queer Woman
----Trans Queer Woman
------Black Trans Queer Woman
Black Lives Matter and LGBTQ rights are separate issues. Absolutely.

Yes. With important distinctions between communities and histories and needs.

But because marginalization cannot be broken down inside of bodies, it can also not be broken down inside of movements.

The brutality experienced by rioters at the hands of the police last week is an echo of both the entirety of the Civil Rights Movement and of Stonewall, the beginning of the LGBTQ movement.

The bodies filling the streets right now grieving and demanding change are not so very different from the bodies that shouted "out of the bars and into the streets" during the White Nights Riots in San Francisco when Harvey Milk was killed.

Over and over again, we have taken to the streets to insist on the undeniable truth of our own humanity.

Over and over we have taken to the streets for each other.

But not near enough.

We have to do more.

We have to show up for the black members of our LGBTQ community, and for the black community at large.

We have to because we also carry the impact of hate in our bones.

Showing up for Black Lives Matter doesn't negate showing up for Pride.

It strengthens both.

We have to show up.

We have to.

For the countless impossible to fully understand or imagine distinctions.

And for the million inseparable lines of intersection between us both.

Yes. This is a call to action to all of us who claim a stripe on the rainbow flag.

The Black Lives Matter movement includes so many of our own.

You might protest. You might have difficult conversations. You might hand out water or register people to vote or put a BLM sign next to your pride flag. Maybe you'll make a commitment to purchase from queer black businesses. Maybe you'll donate or volunteer your time for queer black organizations. Maybe you'll attend city council meetings and get involved. Maybe you'll pledge to listen to and amplify black queer voices.

Whatever it is that you do, I promise, there is a place in the revolution for you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Intersectionality of the Pride and Black Lives Matter Movements

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Yes, it's pride month, and we're usually glittered up and celebrating right about now. Dancing and cheering mediocre parade floats and drinking sticky, warm overpriced drinks while making valid complaints about the commodification of a party we still badly want to attend. Why? Because it's one of the few places we can be fully ourselves.

# data[].attributes.headline
Monsieur je suis entrain de songer à changer mes questions et faire "Est-il possible de communiquer à autrui ce que l’on ressent ?" et "l'art peut-il se passer de règles?" 

# data[].attributes.subject
Monsieur je suis entrain de songer à changer mes questions et faire "Est-il possible de communiquer à autrui ce que l’on ressent ?" et "l'art peut-il se passer de règles?" 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barack Obama takes on 'woke' call-out culture: 'That's not activism'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Muhammad Najem's Twitter and Instagram feeds are filled with selfies, but the self-portraits he shares are far from what many might expect of a teenager. Najem's face takes up just a small portion of the screen - the rest shows exploding bombs, falling buildings, and the cries of pain, anger and frustration that have been the norm in Syria since its civil war began in 2011.

Since he was 14 years old, Najem has made it his mission to show the world the effects the war has had on his town in Eastern Ghouta and the rest of Syria. With the help of his older brother, he made a YouTube and Twitter account and started to share footage with the world. He has shared the story of how his father was killed in a bombing, video of the walls of his home falling apart around him and the remnants of what he says used to be his school.

This is a video showing the world what happened in my school of destruction and shelling. We were in the eastern Ghouta. Look at the study desks. How did the school yard and the writing pad in the classroom all become wreckage?#syria https://t.co/kclntJ8VjG pic.twitter.com/lgTPplkYWA
- muhammad najem (@muhammadnajem20) May 7, 2018

The fall of a barrel of Russian aircraft over my house and the victims of#syria 2018#SaveGhouta 😭 https://t.co/qkh1Ckz7BQ pic.twitter.com/psrSLmcBRA
- muhammad najem (@muhammadnajem20) February 24, 2018

Najem told CBS News that his goal is to use social media to be a voice for the children who have died during the conflict. The United Nations estimates that 9,000 children have been killed or injured in the conflict.

"I share my voice to show people the serious situation in Syria," said Najem, who is now 17. "This is my country, so it's my responsibility. It's my job to show the world the difficult situation in Syria. We need to find a solution to this problem."

Just 20 years ago, the world would likely not have seen Najem's videos or followed his story of being displaced and seeking refuge in Turkey in real time; students from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School may not have been able to register hundreds of thousands of people to vote, or organize a national movement in support of gun reform. Greta Thunberg may not have become a global icon for the fight against climate change, and the incident that a 17-year-old girl captured on her phone that resulted in George Floyd's death may not have gained national attention, if any at all.

But with platforms like Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter and TikTok, Generation Z - defined by Pew Research as those born after 1996 - has been able to use the digital world they were born into to revolutionize activism.

That includes 13-year-old Amariyanna Copeny, also known as "Little Miss Flint." Copeny has been fighting to fix the water crisis in her hometown of Flint, Michigan, since she was 8 years old. Flint became the site of one of the worst man-made environmental disasters in history in 2014 when improperly treated water was provided to residents and complaints of toxic lead levels went ignored.

In 2016, Copeny wrote a letter to then-President Barack Obama and helped persuade him to visit Flint and see how pervasive the crisis was firsthand. Years later, she said she's harnessed the national attention she received to raise more than $500,000, and said she has supplied more than 1 million water bottles to her hometown. She is now raising money to distribute Hydroviv water filters for a long-lasting, more sustainable fix.

"If I don't speak then who will?" Copeny told CBS News. "I just want everybody to have clean water. Everyone thought that it was only Flint that had a bad water crisis. No, America has a water crisis."

Week 1

Everyone knows about Flint but did you know Newark is currently dealing with a lead water crisis. In fact several towns in America have undrinkable water.

Thats why its my goal to bring quality filters to them https://t.co/3lqcfoqzF0
- Mari Copeny (@LittleMissFlint) September 25, 2019

Ziad Ahmed, a 21-year-old Yale student and the CEO/Founder of JUV Consulting, has been working to change the world since he was 14. As a freshman in high school, he created the non-profit organization Redefy, described as "a hub for youth activism." Students involved in the organization create local chapters nationwide focused on disseminating information about social justice issues and policies by way of classroom activities, community programs and social media campaigns. The organization's website also serves as a teen-run news outlet for students to write about these topics.

But Ahmed isn't just using his businesses to ignite conversations about discrimination, mental health and federal policies - he's using his personal accounts, too.

Ahmed has 16,000 followers on TikTok, and has used that platform to discuss the importance of female leadership, the impact of the coronavirus pandemic and why Black Lives Matter is a movement of equality. His Twitter feed is dedicated to supporting people of color and sharing insight on social justice issues, all of which are prominent topics on the app.

"Gen Z is a generation of we. Millennials fought a lot of battles for us. They said, 'I can be whoever I want to be,' and we're saying, 'hell yeah. I can be whoever I want to be, but isn't it more beautiful when we're whoever we want to be together?"

"At the click of a button, we can start a movement. ...The weight of the world is heavy. And there's a lot going on, and there's a lot of change that we need to make and a lot more justice that we need to achieve," Ahmed added. "I would say that my peers are passionate, and I would say my peers are frustrated, but also I think my peers are optimistic. ... We're looking at a world where there is so much injustice and brutality and unfairness and bias, and we're saying, damn it, we can't just let this keep going."

In a 2019 report, Irregular Labs found that nearly three-quarters of the generation believes that being politically and socially engaged is very important to their identity, and for many, "being politically and socially engaged is simply being a good citizen."

"Our generation is a generation of activists," 18-year-old Caleb Lee told CBS News. "We really care about the future of this country, we care about equality."

Lee, who just graduated from high school, said in the three years he took U.S. history, he never "learned about the Black side of history other than slavery and the civil rights movement." He said he only learned about it when he elected to take a contemporary Black history class his senior year.

"I really just learned just how ingrained racism is in our society, in our country," Lee said. "Unfortunately, I feel like a lot of Americans don't have the same opportunities as I did to learn about Black history. But what they do have are their smartphones and social media."

Lee has been filming Black Lives Matter protests in New York City for several weeks. Racial injustices and oppression are difficult for many people to understand, especially when they don't see or experience it firsthand, he said, adding that he wanted to show people the raw emotion that protesters bring to demonstrations.

"When I heard about the systemic killings of African Americans in my country, I felt like I had to do something about it," Lee said. "It's a very complex issue. ...If you don't experience racism day to day, I think it's really hard to know that it exists."

All of the Gen Zers that CBS News spoke with said they don't have the luxury of being silent.

The U.N. expects that tens of millions of people will be displaced because of climate change just within the next decade. Giffords Law Center found that gun violence in the U.S. increased 16% between 2014 and 2017. National reports show that 20% of the world - or roughly 1.6 billion people - lack adequate housing.

"We cannot afford to not care or not to see because this is the world that we're inheriting," Ahmed said. "Whether or not there is clean air or clean water in 50 years, it is a personal and a political issue, and it should be treated as such. It's not a choice to care. I think it's just our reality. We've been forced to care because the systems and people before us let us down and did not invest in the systems that will empower us, that will save us."

The power of Generation Z has not gone unnoticed by other generations.

Martin Luther King III, who is 62, told CBS News that the group has managed to take decades of activism that happened before them - such as the civil rights work of his dad, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. - and make people engage with it in new and unique ways.

"I felt like I was beating my head against the wall, trying to get people to engage, and now you don't have to do that because people want to, they have the desire, they have the propensity" King told CBS News. "This is a manifestation of what we've been working for. ...It's exciting to realize that these changes that some of us have been fighting for forever, are going to happen."

Today's youth seem to have a natural knack for making a difference, King said, and are making bigger changes from younger ages. He said that today's climate and the available technologies have created the perfect opportunity for the generation to put an end to injustice.

"The way my wife characterized it is, we have to work for change, we have to pray for change, we have to be the change," King said, "and if love is not yet won, then the battle is not yet over."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From TikTok to Black Lives Matter, how Gen Z is revolutionizing activism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Muhammad Najem's Twitter and Instagram feeds are filled with selfies, but the self-portraits he shares are far from what many might expect of a teenager. Najem's face takes up just a small portion of the screen - the rest shows exploding bombs, falling buildings, and the cries of pain, anger and frustration that have been the norm in Syria since its civil war began in 2011.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
OK, let's take him." Within seconds two officers grabbed me, each seizing an arm, and shoved me against the drinks machine that rested along the front wall of the McDonald's where I had been eating and working on my report. As I released my clenched hands, my mobile phone and notebook fell to the tiled floor. Then came the sharp sting of the plastic cable tie as it was sealed, pinching tight at the corners of my wrists. I'd never been arrested before, and this wasn't quite how I'd imagined it would go down.

Two days earlier, I'd been sent to Ferguson, Missouri, by the Washington Post, to cover the aftermath of the police shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed black 18-year-old. The fatal gunshots, fired by a white police officer, Darren Wilson, on 9 August 2014, were followed by bursts of anger, in the form of protests and riots. Hundreds, and then thousands, of local residents had flooded the streets. For the Ferguson press corps - which would eventually swell from dozens of reporters for local St Louis outlets into hundreds of journalists from farther afield, including dozens of foreign countries - the McDonald's on West Florissant Avenue became the newsroom.

Because the protests were largely, in those first days, organic and not called by any specific group or set of activists, they were also unpredictable. Some of the demonstrators came to demand an immediate indictment of the officer. Others wanted officials to explain what had happened that day, to tell them who this officer was and why this young man was dead. Scores more stood on pavements and street corners unable to articulate their exact demands - they just knew they wanted justice. Covering Ferguson directly after the killing of Mike Brown involved hours on the streets, with clusters of reporters staked out from the early afternoon into the early hours of the morning. At any point a resident or a group of them could begin a heated argument with the police or a reporter. A demonstration that had for hours consisted of a group of local women standing and chanting on a street corner would suddenly evolve into a chain of bodies blocking traffic, or an impromptu march to the other side of town.

It wasn't much later that the riot-gear-clad officers entered the McDonald's, suggesting we all leave because, with protests still simmering outside, things could get dangerous once the sun went down. Then, when it became clear that we were happy to wait and see how things developed outside, they changed their tune. Now the officers were demanding we leave. When I didn't move fast enough, they grabbed me.

I was led out of the restaurant to wait for transport to police headquarters, with Ryan Reilly of the Huffington Post, who had also been arrested. We were driven across town in a police vehicle also containing a local minister, still in her clerical collar, who sang hymns for the entire journey.

The officer who arrested us had told us, smirking, that we'd be spending the night in the cells, but he was wrong. They locked us in a cell, but about half an hour later, we were turned loose. Inundated with phone calls from other reporters and media outlets, police chief Thomas Jackson had given orders for us to be released. By the time we were given back our belongings - unlaced shoes, notebooks, phones - we'd become momentary media celebrities.

I'd arrived in Ferguson thinking I'd be there for just a couple of days. I'd write a feature or two, and then I'd go back to DC and get on with writing about politics. But it became clear that I wasn't escaping Ferguson any time soon.

More than 150 people were taken into custody by the Ferguson and St Louis County police departments in the week-and-a-half that followed Mike Brown's death, the vast majority for "failure to disperse" charges that came as a result of acts of peaceful protest. I was the first journalist to end up in cuffs while covering the unrest.

Resident after resident had told stories of being profiled, of feeling harassed. These protests, they insisted, were not just about Mike Brown. What was clear, from the first day, was that residents of Ferguson, and all who had travelled there to join them, had no trust in, and virtually no relationship with, the police. The police, in turn, seemed to exhibit next to no humanity towards the residents they were charged with protecting.

What happened in Ferguson would give birth to a movement and set the nation on course for an ongoing public hearing on race that stretched far past the killing of unarmed residents - from daily policing to Confederate imagery to respectability politics to cultural appropriation. The social justice movement spawned from Mike Brown's blood would force city after city to grapple with its own fraught histories of race and policing. As protests propelled by tweets and hashtags spread under the banner of Black Lives Matter and with mobile phone and body camera video shining new light on the way police interact with minority communities, America was forced to consider that not everyone marching in the streets could be wrong. Even if you believe Mike Brown's own questionable choices sealed his fate, did Eric Garner, John Crawford, Tamir Rice, Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, and Sandra Bland all deserve to die?

Ferguson would mark the arrival on the national stage of a new generation of black political activists - young leaders whose parents and grandparents had been born as recently as the 1970s and 1980s, an era many considered to be post-civil rights. Their parents' parents had been largely focused on winning the opportunity to participate in the political process and gaining access to the protections promised them as citizens. Their parents focused on using the newfound opportunities and safeties provided by the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts to claim seats at the table, with political and activist strategies often focused on registering as many black voters and electing as many black leaders to public office as possible. For at least two decades, the days of taking the struggle to the streets had seemed, to many politically active black Americans, a thing of the past.

The shooting of Mike Brown had happened on a quiet side street, in a spot surrounded by four-storey apartment buildings. As the crowds gathered, others took to windows and porches, looking down at the chaos developing below. Within minutes of the shooting, word spread through the surrounding apartments, and beyond, that Brown's hands were up in the air when he was shot. Darren Wilson had encountered Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson while responding to a call about two young men, matching their description, who had just been involved in the robbery of a nearby off-licence.

People in Ferguson did not know whether Brown was attempting to surrender or attempting to attack Wilson when the officer shot him. They did know that the police in Ferguson looked nothing like them: an almost all-white force charged with serving and protecting a majority black city. They knew all too well about the near-constant traffic tickets they were being given, and how often those tickets turned into warrants. And they knew that Mike Mike (as the family called him), the quiet kid who got his hair cut up the street on West Florissant and who was often seen walking around in this neighbourhood, was dead.

Mike Brown's body remained on the hot August ground - a gruesome, dehumanising spectacle that further traumatised the residents of Canfield Drive and would later be cited by local police officials as among their major mistakes.

The Ferguson and St Louis County police had sent scores of officers, some in full riot gear and tactical vehicles, to deal with the growing crowds and to hold them back as they attempted to investigate the scene of the shooting for themselves. All of this is pretty standard for the scene of a police shooting - police, protesters, angered residents and families - but the scale of the immediate response from both the community and law enforcement signalled that Ferguson would be different.

And then, four-and-a-half hours after the shooting, officers finally removed Brown's body from the asphalt. They did not address the crowds who needed answers after spending most of their Saturday hearing inflammatory rumours.

As the police began to leave, church groups started walking down Canfield Drive, following Brown's mother, Lezley McSpadden, who was crying hysterically, to the spot where his blood stained the ground. When they arrived, the groups circled around McSpadden and her husband and began to pray, sing and hug. Some were older folks from the church up the road, others were younger residents who poured out of the Canfield apartments. What had been a rambunctious crowd had composed itself to create a vigil for a violent death.

But the tranquillity didn't last. As the prayer group began to break up, the residents of Canfield began to yell. Prayer wasn't going to fix this. Neither was singing. The police had to answer for this. Why was Mike Brown dead? Why had his body been left out for so long? And when would we get answers? Amid the shouting, someone lit a skip on fire. While moments earlier prayers were being sent up, now it was the flash of flames floating into the night air.

The following day, the Ferguson police department still hadn't explained what had happened or apologised for keeping Brown's body out on the ground for so long. And church groups were calling for a march in the dead teen's honour. After Sunday services concluded, local pastors and their congregations met at the spot where Brown was killed. Hundreds showed up, and started marching and chanting what they believed to be Michael Brown's own words in his final moments.

"Hands up, don't shoot!"

In city after city, I found officers whose actions were at worst criminal and at best lacked racial sensitivity

The cries rang into the air as the crowd, including many students set to begin school the following week, as well as middle-aged residents of the apartment complex, moved forward. As they hit West Florissant and turned left, they were met by a wall of police officers. What had begun as a peaceful march became a heated standoff, blocking traffic in both directions. The crowd continued shouting at the officers, who were shouting back. And as the church groups began to leave, young men emerged who seemed angrier and more determined to extract revenge for Mike Brown's death.

That night, armed vandals took advantage of raging protests to break into the QuikTrip petrol station just a block away from where Brown was killed, grabbing bags of crisps and sodas, cigarettes and lighters, as others ripped the ATM machine from the wall. Before long, the store was ablaze.

Photos and videos from the day of Brown's death had gone viral, but it was the destruction of the QuikTrip, not the police shooting of Mike Brown, that brought the national media's focus to Ferguson. Unrest had now become a riot. Yet another police shooting in a working-class black neighbourhood, even the breaking of a young black body left on public display, didn't catch the attention of the national media. It was the community's enraged response - broken windows and shattered storefronts - that drew the eyes of the nation.

By the time a grand jury concluded on 24 November 2014 that there was not enough evidence to charge Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson with a crime in the killing of Mike Brown, I had been in that city for the better part of three months. I would spend the next eight months crisscrossing the country, visiting city after city to report on and understand the social movement that vowed to awaken a sleeping nation and insisted it begin to truly value black life. Each day, it seemed, there was another shooting. In city after city, I found officers whose actions were at worst criminal and at best lacked racial sensitivity, and black and brown bodies disproportionately gunned down by those sworn to serve and protect.

Meanwhile, the protests had created a countermovement of scepticism, anger and hate, driven by some who genuinely believed that the coverage of Ferguson was overblown and amplified by others with more sinister motivations. These legions of sceptics insisted that the entire story was a fraud, that Mike Brown had deserved his fate, and that tensions in Ferguson were completely stoked by the media - based not on historical injustice, but on real-time race-baiting. The photos and videos that we had posted from the protests had unnecessarily fanned the flames, these critics insisted. And by demanding answers of the Ferguson police department, by wanting to know why this young man had died, the critics declared, we were now responsible for the social unrest in the streets.

On the afternoon of 22 November 2014, two days before the grand jury's decision not to prosecute the officer who shot Michael Brown, Cleveland police officer Timothy Loehmann and his partner, officer Frank Garmback, responded to a call about a man with a gun outside a recreation centre. The man who called the police told the dispatcher that the person was possibly a child playing with a toy, information that was never given to Loehmann and Garmback. The officers believed they were responding to an active shooter.

Loehmann and Garmback pulled up in their cruiser next to a park gazebo where for the last hour 12-year-old Tamir Rice had been throwing snowballs and pretending to fire the toy weapon. Their cruiser slid on the snow-covered grass as Loehmann leaped out from the passenger-side door.

Loehmann claimed he yelled for the boy to show his hands, but that instead of complying, the boy lifted his shirt and reached into his waistband. Loehmann said that when he saw Tamir's elbow moving upwards and the weapon coming up out of his pants, he fired two shots. Video of the shooting showed that less than two seconds passed after the officers arrived before one of them shot Tamir dead.

Less than two seconds passed after the officers arrived before one of them shot Tamir Rice dead

"At its core, Tamir's death is a tale of stunning systemic police incompetence and indifference," wrote Phillip Morris, the sole black metro columnist at the Cleveland Plain Dealer. It had been revealed that Cleveland police had hired Loehmann, the officer who shot Rice, without checking his references or running a serious background check. Had the city done that, they would have uncovered job reviews from his former supervisor which made it clear he would not recommend that Loehmann, the son of a police officer, be given a badge and a gun.

A few weeks later, I flew to Cleveland, and made it just in time to see the last of about 200 protesters storm into Cleveland city hall, their signs and T-shirts declaring JUSTICE FOR TAMIR as they marched up to the council chambers for the body's final meeting of the year.

That night there was a stinging winter breeze blowing off Lake Erie and drifting through a largely empty downtown Cleveland. Typically, this section of the city would be quiet at this time of night, just after dinner on a weekday, with city employees gone from the public buildings - courthouse, administrative offices, city hall - that line these blocks. But on this night, there was a strong, steady sound of dissent.

"This is a movement, not a moment," declared Lorenzo Norris, a local pastor, as he led the racially diverse if largely young group of protesters into the council chambers. The Cleveland protesters were incensed by a recent federal review that had concluded that their police officers regularly exerted excessive force during routine interactions and pulled their guns (and their triggers) inappropriately.

That investigation had been sparked by another shooting in November 2012, during which Cleveland police officers opened fire on a car that had led them on a chase, discharging 137 bullets into the vehicle, only to later discover that both of those killed had been unarmed. Like their protest brethren in Ferguson, the Clevelanders contended that local elected officials hadn't done enough. "We want change," Norris told me as I caught up with the group. "We must have change."

After the protest, I drove over to see my old friend Colin. We weren't exactly surprised by Tamir Rice's death. We knew the Cleveland police weren't known for their rigour or calculated decision-making - in fact, in the last decade, the Department of Justice had issued not just one but two sets of findings that concluded the department routinely violated the civil rights of the city's residents. As young black men from the suburbs riding through the city in cars a little too nice to have either of us behind the wheel, we'd had our fair share of colourful interactions with Cleveland's finest.

At some point in high school, my best friends and I all had a running joke about "the talk", which most of them had been given by a father or mother or some other relative. The underlying theme of this set of warnings passed down from black parents to their children is one of self-awareness: the people you encounter, especially the police, are probably willing to break your body, if only because they subconsciously view you not only as less than, but also as a threat.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Protesters against police shootings march in New York, July 2016. Photograph: Press/Sipa/Rex/Shutterstock

Find almost any high school-age black male and ask him about "the talk". Neither of my parents ever really gave it to me, but I heard "the talk" secondhand from the mothers of a few friends. Besides, when you grow up in a mixed-race home - my mother is white, my father black - no one has to tell you that one half of your family looks different than the other and that you need to pay attention. Close attention.

Say "yes sir" or "yes ma'am" to any officer you encounter. If you get pulled over, keep your hands on the wheel. As we drove around in Colin's car listening to Cleveland rap, we'd keep our wallets in the centre console. That way, we wouldn't have to reach into our pockets. Above all, we knew to never, ever run in the presence of a police officer. That's just asking for trouble.

While "the movement" was born in Ferguson in the summer of 2014, it had been conceived in the hearts and minds of young black Americans at different points in the preceding years. One of these moments came in July 2013 with the Florida jury's decision to find George Zimmerman, the neighbourhood watchman who shot and killed Trayvon Martin, not guilty.

That year was a major awakening point not just for me but also for other young black men and women across the country. Each story of a police shooting solidified the undeniable feeling in our hearts that their deaths and those of other young black men were not isolated. Peaceful black America was awakened by the Zimmerman verdict, which reminded them anew that their lives and their bodies could be abused and destroyed without consequence. Trayvon's death epitomised the truth that the system black Americans had been told to trust was never structured to deliver justice to them. The "not guilty" verdict prompted the creation of a round of boisterous and determined protest groups, initially Florida-based, although they would eventually expand nationally.

Across the country, at a time when Twitter had yet to become the primary platform for news consumption, a 31-year-old activist in Oakland named Alicia Garza penned a Facebook status that soon went viral. She called the status "a love letter to black people".

"The sad part is, there's a section of America who is cheering and celebrating right now. and that makes me sick to my stomach. We GOTTA get it together y'all," she wrote, "stop saying we are not surprised. that's a damn shame in itself. I continue to be surprised at how little Black lives matter. And I will continue that. stop giving up on black life.
"Black people. I love you. I love us. Our lives matter," she concluded.

Her friend and fellow activist Patrisse Cullors found poetry in the post, extracting the phrase "black lives matter" and reposting the status. Soon the two women reached out to a third activist, Opal Tometi, who set up Tumblr and Twitter accounts under the slogan.

"Black Lives Matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise," Garza wrote in the group's official history of its founding. "It is an affirmation of Black folks' contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression."

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Activist Alicia Garza, one of the founders of Black Lives Matter. Photograph: Kristin Little Photography

While the phrase is now the name of an organisation and is often used to describe the broader protest and social justice movement, Black Lives Matter is best thought of as an ideology. Its tenets have matured and expanded over time, and not all of its adherents subscribe to them in exactly the same manner - much the way an Episcopalian and a Baptist, or a religious conservative and a deficit hawk, could both be described as a Christian or a conservative, yet still hold disagreements over policy, tactics and lifestyle. For the young black men and women entering the adult world during the Obama presidency, the ideology of Black Lives Matter, not yet an organisation nor a movement, carried substance, even heft. It was a message that resonated with the young black men and women who had been so outraged and pained by the Zimmerman verdict. And the decision by Tometi to focus on Twitter and Tumblr, then second-tier social media outlets, instead of Facebook, proved a stroke of strategic genius.

Both networks allow for more organic, democratic growth. Unlike Facebook, in which virality is determined by algorithms, visibility on Twitter and Tumblr is determined directly by how compelling a given message, post, or dispatch is. A phrase like #blacklivesmatter, or #ferguson, or, later on, #BaltimoreUprising, can in a matter of moments transform from a singular sentence typed on an individual user's iPhone into an internationally trending topic. #blacklivesmatter didn't catch on immediately, but its time would soon come.

As writer and historian Jelani Cobb wrote in the New Yorker, in what remains one of the definitive profiles of the creation of the organisation: "Black Lives Matter didn't reach a wider public until the following summer, when a police officer named Darren Wilson shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson. Darnell Moore, a writer and an activist based in Brooklyn, who knew Patrice Cullors, coordinated 'freedom rides' to Missouri from New York, Chicago, Portland, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Boston. Within a few weeks of Brown's death, hundreds of people who had never participated in organised protests took to the streets, and that campaign eventually exposed Ferguson as a case study of structural racism in America and a metaphor for all that had gone wrong since the end of the civil-rights movement."

As of March 2016, the 10th anniversary of Twitter, the hashtag #blacklivesmatter had been used more than 12m times - the third most of any hashtag related to a social cause. At the top of the list, however, sits #ferguson, the most-used hashtag promoting a social cause in the history of Twitter, tweeted more than 27m times.

The Movement for Black Lives - as activists had begun calling the protest movement - and the national push for police reform, had faded from the national consciousness during the first months of 2016. There were bursts of attention, but in each instance Americans' focus on race and justice landed like another strong wave, only to recede right back into the ocean. Six months into 2016, my colleagues and I were working on an analysis of the number of Americans killed to date, and had discovered that even after more than a year of protests and outrage, police nationwide were on track to take more lives in 2016 than they had in 2015. Yet none of the men and women killed by police in 2016 had received the same level of attention from the media or had galvanised activists as much as those killed just months earlier.

For racial justice activists, the presidential election was an opportunity to pressure candidates to adopt positions on policing and criminal justice reform, as well as to speak out on other issues of racial disparity.

"People know that the police are still killing people. What we've got to figure out now is what a victory looks like," Kayla Reed, the Ferguson protester still working for the Organization for Black Struggle in St Louis, told me in early 2016. "There isn't going to be a single bill passed that will suddenly encompass all of the ways the system marginalises black and brown people. We have to redo the whole damn thing."

Many of the young activists who had been driven into the street by the police killings of 2014 and 2015 had begun to move away from daily protesting and organising work. Robust conversations circulated about viral videos of the deaths of individuals and the fetishising of black death. Perhaps, some argued, not every video needed to be shared and played on a constant loop.

In early July 2016, two killings reawakened the movement. Videos circulated on social media of the police shootings of two young men, Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. Among the cities that hosted major protests was Dallas, where the police had gone to great pains to support the protesters, cordoning off areas for demonstrators and posing for photos next to signs calling for reforms and justice. It was here that a single gunman attacked white officers in what he later told police negotiators was a targeted retribution for the police killings of black men.

As the list of names grew, so did the urgency of the uprising that would become a movement

A week later, another lone wolf attacked officers in Baton Rouge, killing three. The deaths and injury of the officers in these two cities again shook the nation, underscoring with renewed urgency the depth of the anger and distrust towards police still coursing through America.

The attacks on police officers enraged the law enforcement community. In a country with millions of easily accessible guns and an increasing national distrust of institutions - specifically the police - it wasn't hard to imagine the ease with which someone determined to harm officers could carry out such an attack. "With the number of police shootings that have occurred that seem to be totally unjustified, somewhere in this country, someone was going to do such a thing," John Creuzot, a former prosecutor and judge in Dallas, told me after the shooting.

After the Dallas attack, Barack Obama convened a 33-person conference at the White House, a conversation that ran for four-and-a-half hours - among the longest single-subject conferences of his presidency. The attendees were a mix - young activists such as DeRay Mckesson, civil rights stalwarts such as Al Sharpton, police chiefs and heads of several major police unions, and government officials including the attorney general, Loretta Lynch.

As he facilitated the conversation, Obama often glanced to his left, at Brittany Packnett, a 31-year-old Ferguson protester and co-founder of Campaign Zero - a policy-oriented activist arm that pledged to put forth recommendations for how "we can live in a world where the police don't kill people". This was at least the third time Packnett had met Obama, who after one meeting had been so struck by her command of the room that he pulled her aside to encourage her to one day run for office. She had applied for and was accepted to a spot on the Ferguson Commission, the taskforce convened by Missouri governor Jay Nixon after the unrest in 2014. Next, Obama invited Packnett to join his president's taskforce on 21st-century policing.

I asked what had brought her from the barricades into the policy making rooms - by now, Packnett had joined street protests in more than half a dozen cities.

"Everyone has a role," Packnett said. "There are some people who need to be the revolutionary, and there are some people who need to be at the table in the White House. And I knew it was my job to translate the pain I had seen and experienced in the streets and bring it into these halls of power."

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

A protest on West Florissant Avenue in Ferguson, Missouri. Photograph: Michael B Thomas/AFP/Getty Images

Packnett explains the protest movement as a series of escalating waves. Its conception came from the deaths of Oscar Grant, Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis, which mobilised black Americans in a demand for justice. Its grand birth, first in Ferguson and then throughout the nation in the autumn of 2014, was prompted by the deaths of Eric Garner, John Crawford and Michael Brown, the cases that showed justice for those killed by the police was not forthcoming. As the list of names grew, so did the urgency of the uprising that would become a movement. 2015 brought a third wave of anger and pain: Walter Scott, Freddie Gray, Sandra Bland, Samuel DuBose - another round of death in which the pleas for police accountability became demands. As Obama prepares to leave the White House, it remains to be seen whether the movement birthed by the broken promise of his presidency will live on through the season of his successor.

"The protests will continue," Packnett said confidently when I called her from Cleveland on the first night of the Republican national convention in July. "We're going to work to continue this level of engagement with the next administration; there's just too much at stake." While the targeted killings of the officers in Dallas and Baton Rouge prompted some commentators to declare the movement dead, the activists have not gone quietly.

A few days later came the non-fatal shooting in North Miami of behavioural therapist Charles Kinsey. Kinsey was lying on the ground with his hands in the air, begging not to be shot as he tried to soothe his autistic patient, when an officer fired his gun three times. "I was thinking as long as I have my hands up ... they're not going to shoot me," Kinsey told a local television station from his hospital bed. "Wow, was I wrong."

In the days after the deaths of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile, thousands of people used an online tool provided by Campaign Zero to petition their local elected officials to demand police reform. In mid-July, as the political media gathered in Cleveland for the GOP convention, thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in more than 30 cities.

"We have no choice but to keep going," Packnett told me. "If one of the central demands of the movement is to stop killing us, and they're still killing us, then we don't get to stop, either."
They Can't Kill Us All by Wesley Lowery (Penguin, £9.99). To order a copy for £8.49, go to bookshop.theguardian.com or call 0330 333 6846.
* Follow the Long Read on Twitter at @gdnlongread, or sign up to the long read weekly email here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Black Lives Matter: birth of a movement | Wesley Lowery

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
OK, let's take him." Within seconds two officers grabbed me, each seizing an arm, and shoved me against the drinks machine that rested along the front wall of the McDonald's where I had been eating and working on my report. As I released my clenched hands, my mobile phone and notebook fell to the tiled floor.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
That night the Baron dreamt of many a woe;
And all his warrior-guests, with shade and form
Of witch, and demon, and large coffin-worm,
Were long be-nightmared.

Unhappy is he to whom the memories of childhood bring only fear and sadness. Wretched is he who looks back upon lone hours in vast and dismal chambers with brown hangings and maddening rows of antique books, or upon awed watches in twilight groves of grotesque, gigantic, and vine-encumbered trees that silently wave twisted branches far aloft. Such a lot the gods gave to me-to me, the dazed, the disappointed; the barren, the broken. And yet I am strangely content, and cling desperately to those sere memories, when my mind momentarily threatens to reach beyond to the other.

I know not where I was born, save that the castle was infinitely old and infinitely horrible; full of dark passages and having high ceilings where the eye could find only cobwebs and shadows. The stones in the crumbling corridors seemed always hideously damp, and there was an accursed smell everywhere, as of the piled-up corpses of dead generations. It was never light, so that I used sometimes to light candles and gaze steadily at them for relief; nor was there any sun outdoors, since the terrible trees grew high above the topmost accessible tower. There was one black tower which reached above the trees into the unknown outer sky, but that was partly ruined and could not be ascended save by a well-nigh impossible climb up the sheer wall, stone by stone.

I must have lived years in this place, but I cannot measure the time. Beings must have cared for my needs, yet I cannot recall any person except myself; or anything alive but the noiseless rats and bats and spiders. I think that whoever nursed me must have been shockingly aged, since my first conception of a living person was that of something mockingly like myself, yet distorted, shrivelled, and decaying like the castle. To me there was nothing grotesque in the bones and skeletons that strowed some of the stone crypts deep down among the foundations. I fantastically associated these things with every-day events, and thought them more natural than the coloured pictures of living beings which I found in many of the mouldy books. From such books I learned all that I know. No teacher urged or guided me, and I do not recall hearing any human voice in all those years-not even my own; for although I had read of speech, I had never thought to try to speak aloud. My aspect was a matter equally unthought of, for there were no mirrors in the castle, and I merely regarded myself by instinct as akin to the youthful figures I saw drawn and painted in the books. I felt conscious of youth because I remembered so little.

Outside, across the putrid moat and under the dark mute trees, I would often lie and dream for hours about what I read in the books; and would longingly picture myself amidst gay crowds in the sunny world beyond the endless forest. Once I tried to escape from the forest, but as I went farther from the castle the shade grew denser and the air more filled with brooding fear; so that I ran frantically back lest I lose my way in a labyrinth of nighted silence.

So through endless twilights I dreamed and waited, though I knew not what I waited for. Then in the shadowy solitude my longing for light grew so frantic that I could rest no more, and I lifted entreating hands to the single black ruined tower that reached above the forest into the unknown outer sky. And at last I resolved to scale that tower, fall though I might; since it were better to glimpse the sky and perish, than to live without ever beholding day.

In the dank twilight I climbed the worn and aged stone stairs till I reached the level where they ceased, and thereafter clung perilously to small footholds leading upward. Ghastly and terrible was that dead, stairless cylinder of rock; black, ruined, and deserted, and sinister with startled bats whose wings made no noise. But more ghastly and terrible still was the slowness of my progress; for climb as I might, the darkness overhead grew no thinner, and a new chill as of haunted and venerable mould assailed me. I shivered as I wondered why I did not reach the light, and would have looked down had I dared. I fancied that night had come suddenly upon me, and vainly groped with one free hand for a window embrasure, that I might peer out and above, and try to judge the height I had attained.

All at once, after an infinity of awesome, sightless crawling up that concave and desperate precipice, I felt my head touch a solid thing, and I knew I must have gained the roof, or at least some kind of floor. In the darkness I raised my free hand and tested the barrier, finding it stone and immovable. Then came a deadly circuit of the tower, clinging to whatever holds the slimy wall could give; till finally my testing hand found the barrier yielding, and I turned upward again, pushing the slab or door with my head as I used both hands in my fearful ascent. There was no light revealed above, and as my hands went higher I knew that my climb was for the nonce ended; since the slab was the trap-door of an aperture leading to a level stone surface of greater circumference than the lower tower, no doubt the floor of some lofty and capacious observation chamber. I crawled through carefully, and tried to prevent the heavy slab from falling back into place; but failed in the latter attempt. As I lay exhausted on the stone floor I heard the eerie echoes of its fall, but hoped when necessary to pry it open again.

Believing I was now at a prodigious height, far above the accursed branches of the wood, I dragged myself up from the floor and fumbled about for windows, that I might look for the first time upon the sky, and the moon and stars of which I had read. But on every hand I was disappointed; since all that I found were vast shelves of marble, bearing odious oblong boxes of disturbing size. More and more I reflected, and wondered what hoary secrets might abide in this high apartment so many aeons cut off from the castle below. Then unexpectedly my hands came upon a doorway, where hung a portal of stone, rough with strange chiselling. Trying it, I found it locked; but with a supreme burst of strength I overcame all obstacles and dragged it open inward. As I did so there came to me the purest ecstasy I have ever known; for shining tranquilly through an ornate grating of iron, and down a short stone passageway of steps that ascended from the newly found doorway, was the radiant full moon, which I had never before seen save in dreams and in vague visions I dared not call memories.

Fancying now that I had attained the very pinnacle of the castle, I commenced to rush up the few steps beyond the door; but the sudden veiling of the moon by a cloud caused me to stumble, and I felt my way more slowly in the dark. It was still very dark when I reached the grating-which I tried carefully and found unlocked, but which I did not open for fear of falling from the amazing height to which I had climbed. Then the moon came out.

Most daemoniacal of all shocks is that of the abysmally unexpected and grotesquely unbelievable. Nothing I had before undergone could compare in terror with what I now saw; with the bizarre marvels that sight implied. The sight itself was as simple as it was stupefying, for it was merely this: instead of a dizzying prospect of treetops seen from a lofty eminence, there stretched around me on a level through the grating nothing less than the solid ground, decked and diversified by marble slabs and columns, and overshadowed by an ancient stone church, whose ruined spire gleamed spectrally in the moonlight.

Half unconscious, I opened the grating and staggered out upon the white gravel path that stretched away in two directions. My mind, stunned and chaotic as it was, still held the frantic craving for light; and not even the fantastic wonder which had happened could stay my course. I neither knew nor cared whether my experience was insanity, dreaming, or magic; but was determined to gaze on brilliance and gaiety at any cost. I knew not who I was or what I was, or what my surroundings might be; though as I continued to stumble along I became conscious of a kind of fearsome latent memory that made my progress not wholly fortuitous. I passed under an arch out of that region of slabs and columns, and wandered through the open country; sometimes following the visible road, but sometimes leaving it curiously to tread across meadows where only occasional ruins bespoke the ancient presence of a forgotten road. Once I swam across a swift river where crumbling, mossy masonry told of a bridge long vanished.

Over two hours must have passed before I reached what seemed to be my goal, a venerable ivied castle in a thickly wooded park; maddeningly familiar, yet full of perplexing strangeness to me. I saw that the moat was filled in, and that some of the well-known towers were demolished; whilst new wings existed to confuse the beholder. But what I observed with chief interest and delight were the open windows-gorgeously ablaze with light and sending forth sound of the gayest revelry. Advancing to one of these I looked in and saw an oddly dressed company, indeed; making merry, and speaking brightly to one another. I had never, seemingly, heard human speech before; and could guess only vaguely what was said. Some of the faces seemed to hold expressions that brought up incredibly remote recollections; others were utterly alien.

I now stepped through the low window into the brilliantly lighted room, stepping as I did so from my single bright moment of hope to my blackest convulsion of despair and realisation. The nightmare was quick to come; for as I entered, there occurred immediately one of the most terrifying demonstrations I had ever conceived. Scarcely had I crossed the sill when there descended upon the whole company a sudden and unheralded fear of hideous intensity, distorting every face and evoking the most horrible screams from nearly every throat. Flight was universal, and in the clamour and panic several fell in a swoon and were dragged away by their madly fleeing companions. Many covered their eyes with their hands, and plunged blindly and awkwardly in their race to escape; overturning furniture and stumbling against the walls before they managed to reach one of the many doors.

The cries were shocking; and as I stood in the brilliant apartment alone and dazed, listening to their vanishing echoes, I trembled at the thought of what might be lurking near me unseen. At a casual inspection the room seemed deserted, but when I moved toward one of the alcoves I thought I detected a presence there-a hint of motion beyond the golden-arched doorway leading to another and somewhat similar room. As I approached the arch I began to perceive the presence more clearly; and then, with the first and last sound I ever uttered-a ghastly ululation that revolted me almost as poignantly as its noxious cause-I beheld in full, frightful vividness the inconceivable, indescribable, and unmentionable monstrosity which had by its simple appearance changed a merry company to a herd of delirious fugitives.

I cannot even hint what it was like, for it was a compound of all that is unclean, uncanny, unwelcome, abnormal, and detestable. It was the ghoulish shade of decay, antiquity, and desolation; the putrid, dripping eidolon of unwholesome revelation; the awful baring of that which the merciful earth should always hide. God knows it was not of this world-or no longer of this world-yet to my horror I saw in its eaten-away and bone-revealing outlines a leering, abhorrent travesty on the human shape; and in its mouldy, disintegrating apparel an unspeakable quality that chilled me even more.

I was almost paralysed, but not too much so to make a feeble effort toward flight; a backward stumble which failed to break the spell in which the nameless, voiceless monster held me. My eyes, bewitched by the glassy orbs which stared loathsomely into them, refused to close; though they were mercifully blurred, and shewed the terrible object but indistinctly after the first shock. I tried to raise my hand to shut out the sight, yet so stunned were my nerves that my arm could not fully obey my will. The attempt, however, was enough to disturb my balance; so that I had to stagger forward several steps to avoid falling. As I did so I became suddenly and agonisingly aware of the nearness of the carrion thing, whose hideous hollow breathing I half fancied I could hear. Nearly mad, I found myself yet able to throw out a hand to ward off the foetid apparition which pressed so close; when in one cataclysmic second of cosmic nightmarishness and hellish accident my fingers touched the rotting outstretched paw of the monster beneath the golden arch.

I did not shriek, but all the fiendish ghouls that ride the night-wind shrieked for me as in that same second there crashed down upon my mind a single and fleeting avalanche of soul-annihilating memory. I knew in that second all that had been; I remembered beyond the frightful castle and the trees, and recognised the altered edifice in which I now stood; I recognised, most terrible of all, the unholy abomination that stood leering before me as I withdrew my sullied fingers from its own.

But in the cosmos there is balm as well as bitterness, and that balm is nepenthe. In the supreme horror of that second I forgot what had horrified me, and the burst of black memory vanished in a chaos of echoing images. In a dream I fled from that haunted and accursed pile, and ran swiftly and silently in the moonlight. When I returned to the churchyard place of marble and went down the steps I found the stone trap-door immovable; but I was not sorry, for I had hated the antique castle and the trees. Now I ride with the mocking and friendly ghouls on the night-wind, and play by day amongst the catacombs of Nephren-Ka in the sealed and unknown valley of Hadoth by the Nile. I know that light is not for me, save that of the moon over the rock tombs of Neb, nor any gaiety save the unnamed feasts of Nitokris beneath the Great Pyramid; yet in my new wildness and freedom I almost welcome the bitterness of alienage.

For although nepenthe has calmed me, I know always that I am an outsider; a stranger in this century and among those who are still men. This I have known ever since I stretched out my fingers to the abomination within that great gilded frame; stretched out my fingers and touched a cold and unyielding surface of polished glass.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kit Wilson's introduction when meeting other people is: "Hi, I'm Kit. I use they/them pronouns." That means that when people refer to Kit in conversation, the first-year student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee would prefer them to use "they" rather than "she" or "he".

As a child, Wilson never felt entirely female or entirely male. They figured they were a "tomboy" until the age of 16, but later began to identify as "genderqueer".

"Neither end of the [male/female] spectrum is a suitable way of expressing the gender I am," Wilson says. "Sometimes I feel 'feminine' and 'masculine' at the same time, and other times I reject the two terms entirely."

Earlier this year, Wilson asked friends to call them "Kit," instead of the name they (Wilson) had grown up with, and to use the pronoun "they" when talking about them.

Sharing one's pronouns and asking for others' pronouns when making introductions is a growing trend in US colleges.

For example, when new students attended orientation sessions at American University in Washington DC a few months ago, they were asked to introduce themselves with their name, hometown, and preferred gender pronoun (sometimes abbreviated to PGP).

"We ask everyone at orientation to state their pronouns," says Sara Bendoraitis, of the university's Center for Diversity and Inclusion, "so that we are learning more about each other rather than assuming."

A handful of universities go further and allow students to register their preferred pronouns in the university computer systems - and also a preferred name.

At the University of Vermont, which has led this movement, students can choose from "he," "she," "they," and "ze," as well as "name only" - meaning they don't want to be referred to by any third-person pronoun, only their name.

"It maximises the student's ability to control their identity," says Keith Williams, the university's registrar, who helped to launch the updated student information system in 2009. Most people stick to the default option, "none", which means they are not registering a pronoun - presumably because they are content to let people decide whether they are a "he" or a "she".

Out of about 13,000 students currently enrolled, some 3,200 have entered preferred names in the system, and about half of them have specified preferred pronouns, Williams says. He adds that this doesn't necessarily mean they are transgender - they could be non-transgender students specifying "he" and "she".

At Harvard University, which followed Vermont's example at the beginning of this academic year, about half of the approximately 10,000 students registered in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences have specified preferred pronouns, and slightly more than 1% of those - about 50 out of 5,000 - chose pronouns other than "she" or "he", according to registrar Mike Burke.

At most other US universities the growing use of "non-binary" pronouns remains less formalised but is often encouraged in various ways. Signs and badges found throughout campuses display slogans such as Pronouns Matter or Ask Me About My Pronouns. Professors may be invited to training sessions at the start of each year and are sometimes urged to include their pronouns in their email signature, for example, "John Smith (he/him/his)".

A card developed by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee LGBT Resource Center in 2011 has been widely reproduced and distributed across the US.

One side of the card lists eight pronouns, from "ey" to "zie," and illustrates how they change depending on their role in a sentence. Instead of "he/she," "him/her," "his/her," "his/hers," and "himself/herself" it would be:

The other side of the card has fill-in-the-blank sentences to give people an opportunity to practise using the unfamiliar pronouns.

"The intention behind it was to ensure that the campus was fostering an inclusive environment," says Jennifer Murray, the director of the resource centre.

All the pronouns on the card were already in use, Murray says, either among students or members of Milwaukee's LGBT community. Although it might have been simpler to suggest just one non-binary pronoun, she says the staff of the resource centre didn't want to "limit folks' choices".

Some terms come from foreign languages - such as the German-inspired "sie" - others from fiction. For example, "ze" and "per" are the pronouns of a future utopia Marge Piercy describes in her feminist sci-fi novel Woman on the Edge of Time (1976). Some are drawn from the plant or animal worlds, or refer to mythical beings with which the individual may identify.

It's is not the first time people have tried to coin new pronouns. Writers have long been frustrated by the lack of a neat way to refer to someone of unknown gender - "he or she" is clunky, and if you use it several times in quick succession, "your writing ends up looking like an explosion in a pedants' factory", as Guardian columnist Lucy Mangan once put it.

Most of these made little impact, though one - "thon", a contraction of "that one" - got into two American dictionaries.

This use of "they" annoys some grammarians. While it does feel natural for most English speakers to say something like "Someone lost their wallet," critics argue that "they" should really only be used to refer to plural nouns. And even those comfortable with "Someone lost their wallet" may have doubts when "Someone" is replaced by a person's name.

It's for this reason that when the pronoun registration system was developed at the University of Vermont in 2009, professors at first argued "ze" would be acceptable, but "they" would not. "They" was only added as an option in 2014.

But English has a precedent for a plural pronoun coming to be used in the singular - the pronoun "you". Until the 17th Century a single person was addressed with "thou" and "thee". Later "you" became perfectly acceptable in both plural and singular. Neither McConnell-Ginet nor Baron sees any reason why the same could not happen with "they".

Most students have "some level of understanding about pronouns", which was not the case a few years ago, says the National Union of Students' LGBT officer, Fran Cowling. NUS name badges now include space for preferred pronouns.

Cambridge University students started a campaign called Make No Assumptions about a year ago. One of its badges (above) prompts readers to ask about the wearer's pronouns. Another has empty spaces for pronouns to be filled in.

Emrys Travis, Cambridge University Student Union's LGBT+ campaigns officer, uses "they," "them," and "their," but also "ey," "em," and "eir" with trans friends. "A lot of them mess up - repeatedly, often," Travis says. "As long as I think they're trying, it doesn't bother me."

Travis asked their director of studies to email each of their (Travis's) lecturers with a request to use "they" and "them" when referring to Travis and none objected. "Cambridge, in general, is a great place to be trans," they say.

However, learning to use new pronouns or the singular "they" is not easy.

Like Harvard, Ohio University gave students the option to register their preferred name and pronoun this year, but not all professors were ready for it. Some thought "they" was a typo on their student rosters, says LGBT centre director delfin bautista (bautista writes their name without any capital letters).

Slip-ups with preferred names are rarer than with preferred pronouns, bautista says, but can happen too. Calling someone by their rejected birth name is termed "deadnaming". More broadly, referring to a person in a way that does not reflect their gender identity is called "misgendering".

When students suspect that professors may not get the point of gender-neutral pronouns, they may play it safe and stick with "he" or "she".

Sarah Grote, an Ohio University student, uses "they/them" with close friends but hasn't entered this in the student information system to avoid inconveniencing or alienating professors. "I still need their recommendations... and this is still south-eastern Ohio," Sarah says.

In another socially conservative region, one university had to swiftly backtrack after tentatively starting a discussion about pronouns this summer. Donna Braquet, director of the Pride Center at the University of Tennessee posted an explanation of gender-neutral pronouns on the university website in August and encouraged people on campus to ask one another about their pronouns.

The goal was to make the climate more trans-friendly, but it was widely mistaken for a change in university policy. Some of the press coverage imagined that "he" and "she" were being outlawed. One opinion column even used the headline "New pronouns for the traveling freak show". State and federal lawmakers complained to the university, and the post was removed the following week.

It's not just in US universities that gender-neutral language is advancing. Last year, Facebook gave users the option to customise gender beyond male and female, and pick a pronoun from "he", "she", and "they". This summer the Oxford Dictionaries website added the honorific "Mx", defining it as "a title used before a person's surname or full name by those who wish to avoid specifying their gender or by those who prefer not to identify themselves as male or female". Meanwhile, Caitlyn Jenner and the controversy over Benedict Cumberbatch playing a non-binary character in the film Zoolander 2 have kept the subject of gender identity topical.

Universities, however, remain the most fertile ground for new pronouns.

kat baus, a non-binary student who graduated from Harvard this year - and who also writes their name without capital letters - regrets that the university's computer system was not introduced earlier. "It would have been a lot easier and less awkward," baus says.

baus sent emails or visited professors during office hours to explain their gender identity and pronouns. In smaller classes they (baus) brought it up when introducing themself.

"I don't know a single trans person who likes having that conversation," baus says.

Being able to do it with the click of a mouse would have allowed them to get straight down to their work in class, baus says - and would have allowed their classmates to get straight down to theirs.

It is sometimes difficult to determine somebody's gender by sight but what if you're blind? Mike Lambert recently experienced this problem when he attended a course on equality and diversity.

"I listen hard to Nina's voice. There's something soft and tentative about it - but the pitch is unmistakeably male... I tell myself that any concerns I have about Nina's gender are a thing of little consequence. The whole point of the day is equality and diversity, and I shouldn't get so hung-up trying to slot people into neat pigeon-holes. And then, I'm struck by a horrifying thought. How am I going to get through more than a couple of sentences without committing myself to 'he' or 'she', 'his' or 'hers'?"

Subscribe to the BBC News Magazine's email newsletter to get articles sent to your inbox.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beyond 'he' and 'she': The rise of non-binary pronouns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kit Wilson's introduction when meeting other people is: "Hi, I'm Kit. I use they/them pronouns." That means that when people refer to Kit in conversation, the first-year student at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee would prefer them to use "they" rather than "she" or "he". As a child, Wilson never felt entirely female or entirely male.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Protest expert Aldon Morris explains how social justice movements succeed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On Friday, Janelle Monáe came out as non-binary, retweeting a post which read: "There is absolutely nothing better than living outside the gender binary."

Monáe's tweet came after the recent announcement of Sam Smith, who recently said they felt " just as much a woman as I am man". Both celebrities joined the increasing number of young people who identify neither as male or female.

Non-binary people tend to prefer using they/them pronouns (although not exclusively - some use she and he interchangeably). If gender neutral pronouns intimidate you, you're not the only one. As someone who is new to using them (a number of my friends have recently started to identify as non-binary), I confess it can be intimidating when you want to respect someone's wishes without making any blunders.

Putting someone's dignity before my shyness about how to use a pronoun is, of course, the bare minimum. But I admit to having made mistakes - even avoiding using pronouns in the past, for fear of getting it wrong.

It really isn't that hard, however, to get it right.

Who uses they/them pronouns, and why?

More and more people are using gender-neutral pronouns. In 2015, of 4,000 students at Harvard who had submitted preferred pronouns, around 1% chose pronouns other than "he" or "she". Last year, Merriam-Webster made the singular gender-neutral use of "they" its word of the year, based on the fact that it had seen a 313% increase in searches for its definition that year.

Reasons for choosing gender neutral pronouns are complex and personal. Some people do it because they don't feel they fit into a gender. For others, it's a form of protest: they contest rigid gender expectations and would rather live without them. Being gender non-conforming, right down to their pronouns, is how they choose to identify.

So please, if you learn someone uses they/them pronouns, don't respond: "We get it OK - she's gay!" - as my friend's parents recently did.

Why they/them?

It is normal in the English language to use they/them pronouns when we don't know the gender of the person to which we're referring, or if we want our sentence to be applicable to all genders.

This isn't new - the saying "Everybody loves their own mother" has been used since around late 1300. Both Jane Austen and Geoffrey Chaucer - who died in 1400 - used pronouns that way.

But what about the plural?

While it is no longer grammatically incorrect to use they/them as singular anymore, people still get confused about it. A friend's parent recently responded to their pronouns, saying: "But if I tell Shelly you're coming round for dinner, she'll think you're bringing extra people!"

Try this: if you are using the pronoun in a scenario where there is no confusion over singular versus plural, just go ahead and use it ("You are going to meet my friend Poppy today, I hope you like them").

If you are using it in an instance where it might be misconstrued as plural, you can change the first part of the sentence to make it clear ("I may bring a friend, their name is Poppy").

If you still feel that is confusing, you can be explicit ("I asked Poppy - who uses they/them pronouns - they might come"). This also takes the onus off your non-binary friend for having to explain it themselves later.

What to avoid

Avoid assuming every person's gender. Feel free to ask people when you meet them what pronouns they use. Feel free to put your own pronouns in your email signature, or to introduce people using your pronouns (this can take the focus off non-binary people having to do all the work).

What to embrace

Embrace doing your own research on pronouns, without expecting non-binary people to educate you. Encourage open dialogue, which means being open about your own shortcomings or fears, when relevant. Ensure this is a means to steer conversation forward ("Hey, did I get that right just then?") not back ("Well actually this is pretty scary for me, so you shouldn't correct me").

What if I get pushback?

People may use your respect for another's pronouns as a means to argue with you about the broader political context around gender and/or LGBTQ rights. But you don't need to be needlessly drawn into an argument unless that's where you want to go. Briefly explain why you are doing it, and if the challenge escalates, consider shutting down the conflict ("It's my choice to respect their wishes"; or even the more direct "I don't want to argue about this").

What if I make a mistake?

When you make a mistake, apologize, be gracious, and move on. Generally people aren't out to get you. Don't get too hung up: my experience is that people know getting it wrong is part of the process and are forgiving if they feel you are trying your best.

Sometimes you can check that you said the right thing first, rather than getting caught up in your head ("Hey, when I said that, was it offensive?'). Above all, recognize mistakes happen and apologies are OK, but don't mistake them for real work. Saying sorry a handful of times might be fine, but if you're misgendering someone over and over again you might want to think about why, and do better.

You'll be OK

Exposure is key. Keep using they/them, and soon it will feel normal. That's the aim.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
So your friend came out as non-binary: here's how to use pronouns they/them

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On Friday, Janelle Monáe came out as non-binary, retweeting a post which read: "There is absolutely nothing better than living outside the gender binary." Monáe's tweet came after the recent announcement of Sam Smith, who recently said they felt " just as much a woman as I am man".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When food is needed for a scene, directors prefer to use real food in movies and TV shows, and somebody has to make sure it looks right on screen.

Chef and food stylist Zoe Hegedus worked on "Midsommar," where she baked over 100 pies, prepared about 50 fake yolks, and plated 200 real yolks for the production.

In order to keep food fresh for long shoot days, food stylists will do everything from spraying foods to make them look shiny, to preparing "fake" edible meat that won't go bad.

Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.

Narrator: This is a dish from the movie "Midsommar."

Pelle: I was most excited for you to come.

Narrator: You might think that bright yellow center you see is an egg yolk, but it isn't. See, over the course of a 10- to 12-hour filming day, egg yolks tend to dry out and change color. So Zoe Hegedus came up with the idea to top some of the plates with edible spheres made of orange and mango instead. That's a day in the life of a Hollywood food stylist.

When food is involved, and it's involved in movies a lot, food stylists have to figure out how to make the food pop on screen no matter what hurdles are thrown at them. They're the movies' biggest problem solvers you never think about. The first thing a food stylist needs is to be prepared to make a lot of food for a lot of takes. For this scene in "The Amazing Spider-Man," the food stylist cooked 90 branzinos. And the food stylist for 2014's "Chef" made 800 Cubano sandwiches.

Zoe baked over 100 pies, prepared about 50 fake yolks, and plated 200 real yolks for "Midsommar," a horror film that takes place at the height of the Swedish Midsummer festival. It's a celebration, so naturally there were a ton of food requirements.

Zoe Hegedus: Directors, they prefer not using fake things on movies. It's really important for them to use real food, so I always try, like, do everything real.

Narrator: These little butter churches were actually made out of plaster and are one of the few fake food items audiences saw in "Midsommar." If you're using real food, you have to make sure it tastes fresh.

One of the first problems Zoe had to solve was what to do with the meat pies, which had to be edible for this shot. The movie was filmed in Hungary during the late summer months of 2018, one of the hottest summers on record in the country, so keeping a pie filled with meat out in the sun for a 12-hour shoot and then asking actor Jack Reynor to take multiple big bites for multiple takes wouldn't go well, and there needed to be something inside the pie.

Zoe: You can't make the same size and texture with an empty pie. For example, this shape wouldn't stay if it would be empty.

Narrator: The solution? A filling of oatmeal mixed with cocoa powder, which is going to last a lot longer out in the sun. Oatmeal mimicked the texture of ground meat, and the powder mimicked the color.

Zoe: Oatmeal is a really, really good ingredient to use on set and on camera because you can shape it and, like, color it with, like, edible ingredients and make something also that is tasty.

Narrator: She had to get even more creative for what would be the toughest challenge of the entire movie, that dish with the egg yolk in the center, called the Sun's Eye. Both the specificity of the ingredients and the sheer amount made this dish a huge challenge to bring to life.

Zoe: It's supposed to have pickled herring in it, but we didn't put it because it wouldn't really change the look of the dish, but it would have been impossible to use herring on that day with the heat and, like, the smell.

Narrator: That intense heat not only dried out the yolks, but it caused some of them to burst out on the first go-around. That meant Zoe and her team had to change the dishes out every 15 minutes. On top of that, some of the cast was allergic to eggs, so Zoe had to completely rethink the center of the dish. Instead of using yolks, she made those mango and orange edible spheres. She put the frozen mixture into a sodium alginate solution, where a thin membrane formed to give it the right texture. Put it next to a real egg, and you can barely spot the difference.

One challenge for any movie is keeping food that's been sitting out looking fresh. So Zoe relied on some tried-and-true tricks of the trade. She sprayed potatoes with cooking spray to make them look like they were fresh out of the oven. She mixed water and oil to top the egg yolk dish, which not only made it look fresher and tastier for longer but also added some weight to the chives, which kept getting swept away in the wind. But there's a risk of going too overboard. Cooking spray looks perfect on potatoes, but if she used corn syrup instead, it would've looked too shiny. In addition, she sprayed the apples with only a couple spritzes of water. Any more and they might start looking fake.

Zoe: It's like, just because you see some water drops on something, you can feel that freshness.

Narrator: And speaking of apples, there are a ton of them lingering in the background of "Midsommar." You might have noticed them in the kitchen as Dani baked pies. Even this background item had to be vetted, and it wasn't as easy as picking apples up from a store. They had to look like they were grown in the commune.

Zoe: So, it was important to see that the apples are grown really close, because it's important to show that they have it in the community where they live and it wasn't just bought somewhere in the supermarket.

Narrator: The perfect apples for this scene actually needed to look imperfect, like they were just plucked right off a tree. So half of them are from a nearby farmer's market, and the other half were literally plucked off trees.

Zoe: You can see it's smaller. You see some, like, ugly dots on it also.

Narrator: The most elaborate project Zoe and her team worked on was the May Queen feast. They had some freedom in designing the display but still had to follow some important rules. Everything needed to look rustic, it needed to be traditionally Swedish, and it needed to feel like it was grown locally, so there was a lot of trial and error.

One cake Zoe made was rejected because it looked too modern, but this Hårga man pie, shaped like a man lying in apples, met the specifications and made the cut. So did this dish made with a goat carcass, which likely would have come from their farm. The team also did a lot of background research, like reading Nordic cookbooks to make sure everything they used was part of Scandinavian cuisine. Their findings showed up on the table.

They found that asparagus was used for special occasions in Sweden, so they built this asparagus tower, which took them up to five hours to construct. In the movie version, the base is made up of meatballs, which helped it pass the rustic test.

Crayfish-centered parties are a Swedish tradition, and the crustacean would likely be something the commune would find around them, so the food-styling team spent around six hours building this elaborate crayfish tower.

Since these displays weren't meant to be consumed by the actors, freshness was less of an issue. However, as with the Sun's Eye plates, the vegetables would dry out in the sun, so Zoe changed pieces out as frequently as possible.

Something most chefs don't have to think about is how their food will be filmed. Zoe knew there would be a lot of shots from high above, so she made sure every single display was really big and really colorful. But what happens when there is a piece of food you need and it isn't even available in the country you're filming in? The movie needed a fresh herring for this scene, where Dani attempts to eat one whole. This moment was specifically built into the script.

Server: It's tradition, for good luck.

Sten: Yeah.

Dani: What?

Narrator: Herring is incredibly abundant in Sweden, but the movie was filmed in Hungary.

Zoe: In Sweden, you can go to every market, and you just find the herring. But, like, in Hungary, I went, like, all the markets, all the shops, and I found, like, smoked ones, like, pickled ones, but without head, or it was too small, or it was too big, or it was just not good for the movie. So at the end, the herring had to be shipped from France.

Narrator: They got 20 pieces shipped to them. They were shipped at the last minute, and the team had little room for failure. The most important thing for the scene was that actress Florence Pugh was comfortable. So Zoe took 10 herrings and cut and prepared the fish in multiple styles to give Florence and the filmmakers options. In the end, they landed on a fish that was boneless but still had its head and tail. They were able to get the perfect take after seven or eight tries.

So, why didn't Zoe make her life easier and get a fish she found in Hungary or just have the art department make a fake fish that met the scene's needs? Because without that real fish, you wouldn't have gotten that authentically horrified look on Florence Pugh's face, and that's when going the extra mile for your food in a movie makes it all worth it.
EDITOR'S NOTE: This video was originally published in December 2019.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What it takes to be a food stylist for movies and TV shows

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When food is needed for a scene, directors prefer to use real food in movies and TV shows, and somebody has to make sure it looks right on screen. Chef and food stylist Zoe Hegedus worked on "Midsommar," where she baked over 100 pies, prepared about 50 fake yolks, and plated 200 real yolks for the production.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Journal Information

Oral History aims to contribute to developments in the theory and practice of oral history. It welcomes contributions, whether long or short articles, news items, reviews or reports of meetings, conferences or new projects. The joint editors welcome contributions from a wide range of disciplines and practices, for example, women's studies, sociology, cultural studies, anthropology, politics, social policy, social administration, museum studies, archive work, health studies, education, library and information services, community publishing, folklore, media studies, photography, broadcasting, nursing, social work, psychology, psychiatry, and in fact any area where the significance of orality, personal testimony and remembering is understood and valued. We welcome a variety of approaches from people from different countries and from different backgrounds.

Publisher Information

The Oral History Society promotes the collection, preservation and use of recorded memories of the past.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hopes and Reality in the West Indian Migration to Britain on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Journal Information Oral History aims to contribute to developments in the theory and practice of oral history. It welcomes contributions, whether long or short articles, news items, reviews or reports of meetings, conferences or new projects.

# data[].attributes.headline
l´autoportrait permet-il de mieux se connaître ?

# data[].attributes.subject
l´autoportrait permet-il de mieux se connaître ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Remarks by UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador David Beckham at World Children’s Day 2019

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEW YORK, 20 November 2019 - “Good morning everyone and thank you for being here today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Unicef Goodwill Ambassadors are often celebrities who travel the world using their fame to promote Unicef in their home countries and internationally. These 308 celebrities are known for being especially prominent as Goodwill Ambassadors for Unicef in the past few decades, and I think what they've done using their fame for good is pretty darn awesome.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unicef Goodwill Ambassadors are often celebrities who travel the world using their fame to promote Unicef in their home countries and internationally. These 308 celebrities are known for being especially prominent as Goodwill Ambassadors for Unicef in the past few decades, and I think what they've...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kristin Davis UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador meeting with Nancy Pelosi

Goodwill ambassador is a post-nominal honorific title, a professional occupation and/or authoritative designation that is assigned to a person who advocates for a specific cause or global issue on the basis of their notability such as a public figure, advocate or an authoritative expert. Sometimes the role of a goodwill ambassador is presented as "Ambassador" or "Goodwill Ambassador" preceding the first and last name, the titled name of the individual is always presented with an organizational, regional or national affiliation. Goodwill ambassadors generally deliver goodwill by promoting ideals or positions from one entity to another, or to a population to establish a benevolent relationship. A goodwill ambassador may be an individual from one country who resides in or travels to another country on a diplomatic mission (or international friendship mission) at a peer to peer level. This can be country to country, state to state, city to city, or as an intermediate emissary representative of the people of a specific organization or cultural group, such as an indigenous tribe, marginalized people or enclave population.

Goodwill ambassadors have been a part of governments, institutions and countries for as long as diplomacy has existed. They represent their constituents by traveling abroad exchanging or delivering gifts and presents while bringing awareness to their cause or purpose through public relations activities and organizing events. Goodwill ambassadors are responsible for delivering humanitarian relief, implementing social welfare programs and providing development assistance to demonstrate benevolence and compassion between parties. Most often nation-states, international and non-governmental organizations use well-known celebrities such as actors, actresses, musicians, scientists, authors, former politicians and other high society figures; but they also engage civilians, professionals and government officials to fulfill the role.

Goodwill missions of US states and international nations are usually carried out or overseen by the head of state, but do not necessarily involve official diplomatic credentials beyond a letter of presentation, letters patent, or a letter of credence. It is very rare that a goodwill ambassador is ever issued a diplomatic passport. However, some countries, such as Haiti and Saint Lucia do issue credentials that include diplomatic immunity for goodwill ambassadors and organizations sometimes issue a civil service officer credential or international identification travel document such as a laissez-passer.

Recognition as an authority is designated by an official document that entitles the subject to the use of the honorable title or can be developed over time through social media or public relations. The title is closely associated with the personal name, such as (Angelina Jolie, Goodwill Ambassador) or (Angelina Jolie, UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador) or (Goodwill Ambassador Angelina Jolie). Any regional, state, nation or body politic has the authority to officially designate goodwill ambassadors.

Col. Benjamin Franklin walked in the honorable footsteps of his mentor Cotton Mather forming the first do-good associations in Colonial America.

Many say the first ambassador of good-will was Ambassador Benjamin Franklin on his mission to France in December 1776, when the United States was just a few months old and embroiled in the Revolutionary War. Others might say it was pioneer Daniel Boone who was hired as a civilian colonel to help Col. Judge Richard Henderson build the Wilderness Road and negotiate with good-will the Treaty of Watauga with the Cherokee to establish the Transylvania Colony on May 23, 1775. At its time, the Transylvania Colony was the first democratic government free of British Monarchy calling for a "manly government", Boonesborough had both indigenous and free slaves as civil participants.

Benjamin Franklin in colonial times was also known as Silence Dogood (a pen name) who wrote a series of letters that were published and widely read. Almost 50 years before the American Revolution Franklin adapted; Bonifacius: Essays to Do Good, by the Puritan preacher and family friend Cotton Mather, which Franklin often cited as a key influence throughout his life. His work preached the importance of forming voluntary associations to benefit society. While Franklin learned about forming do-good associations from Cotton Mather, his benevolence, humility and organizational skills made him the most influential force in making voluntarism an enduring part of the American ethos.

The word "good-will" first appears in American newspapers as early as 1789 in the Gazette of the United-States where the term was associated synonymously with words like benevolence, charity, compassion, delight, divinity, grace, honor, humanity, humility, mankind and virtue all in a single thought.

The term "ambassador of good-will" appears in 1920 discussing a delegation of government supported business people from Texas visiting Mexico and establishing friendly business relationships. The article called for "increasing the ranks of ambassadors of good-will" by inviting other businesses and states to their commission. The term "goodwill ambassador" finally emerges into the international landscape as a highly defining and descriptive term in the early 20th Century through a public figure who later proves to be a controversial one. In December 1927 it was applied to aviator and ambassador, Col. Charles Lindbergh by the international news media when he scheduled an International Goodwill Tour visiting Mexico, Central America, Colombia and Venezuela in the Spirit of St. Louis.

The idea was effectively merged from the public domain creating the new term in an article from the Indianapolis Times; "Doll Ambassadors from Japan Viewed by Capital: School Children's Babies Enter U.S. on Mission of Good Will; Washington, December 20, 1927 - Japan's "Doll Ambassadors of Goodwill" received a national welcome..." In subsequent years the idea is used by its commissioners to create an honorary ex-officio civilian post or use the role of goodwill ambassador as an actual representative substitute for the honorary duty of an iconic historical figure, like the Kentucky Colonel. In the 1930s the Kentucky and Tennessee Colonel titles were awarded to people that would make goodwill ambassadors (ambassadors of goodwill) for the state. Elvis Presley, well known as a Goodwill Ambassador for many causes and ideas, was both a Kentucky and Tennessee Colonel, receiving commissions from various governors.

The United States, the United Nations, the Commonwealth of Nations, Latin America, African Nations were all engaged in commissioning goodwill ambassadors to address public relations issues, create soft power, or promote cultural understanding selecting high profile celebrities that are popular within their own society during and after World War II. The entertainers in the USO were all considered to be Goodwill Ambassadors of the United States.

In the 1980s, the Harlem Globetrotters were sometimes known as America's Goodwill Ambassadors especially when performing exposition basketball internationally. In 1998 they registered GOODWILL AMBASSADORS ® under Serial Number #75258888 - with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in the category of education and entertainment services. Based on Harlem Globetrotters International statement the trademark is used in "basketball clinics and exhibitions; and conducting speeches, seminars, and workshops relating to personal awareness, achievement, and motivation." Essentially their trademark blocks anyone in the United States from offering educational or entertainment services using the term [Goodwill Ambassadors].

Unofficially there were the goodwill ambassadors all over the United States with the hosts/hostesses of the Welcome Wagon in the 1960s, 70s and 80s who welcomed new residents with a promotional gift bag, a service provider directory and advertisers coupons from local merchants; section 293.357-018 of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles lists this type of work for the role of a "GOODWILL AMBASSADOR" today. These concessions were often franchised to a local provider in most main-street towns, the person in charge was most informally called or became known as the "goodwill ambassador" of the town.

DOT 293.357-018 - GOODWILL AMBASSADOR: Promotes goodwill and solicits trade for local business firms who are members of parent organization: Develops list of prospective clients from such sources as newspaper items, utility companies' records, and local merchants. Visits homes of new residents, prospective parents, recently married couples, engaged persons, and other prospects to explain and sell services available from local merchants. Usually presents token gifts or gift certificates to induce clients to use local services or purchase local merchandise. Prepares reports of services rendered and visits made for parent organization and member firms. May solicit new organization membership. May explain community services available. May organize clubs and plan parties for new residents.

Angelina Jolie, UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador at the World Economic Forum with spouse Brad Pitt and Kofi Annan, secretary-general, United Nations, with his spouse, in Davos, Switzerland, in 2006

According to the United Nations Dag Hammarskjöld Library; "United Nations Goodwill Ambassadors and Messengers of Peace are distinguished individuals, carefully selected from the fields of art, literature, science, entertainment, sports or other fields of public life, who have agreed to help focus worldwide attention on the work of the United Nations. Backed by the highest honor bestowed by the Secretary-General on a global citizen, these prominent personalities volunteer their time, talent and passion to raise awareness of United Nations efforts to improve the lives of billions of people everywhere .. on the other hand, [goodwill ambassadors] are designated by the heads of United Nations Funds, Programmes and specialized Agencies, e.g., UNICEF, the World Food Programme (WFP) and UNHCR. Goodwill Ambassadors are subsequently endorsed by the Secretary-General. .. In 2010, in response to a General Assembly request to mark the International Year of Biodiversity, for the first time the Secretary-General appointed a United Nations Goodwill Ambassador."

The United Nations agencies appoint and employ popular celebrities to advocate their missions, including the FAO, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNEP, UNFPA, UNODC, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNIDO, UNESCO, the WFP, the WHO, UN Women, the OHCHR, UN-Habitat, and the IMO; all have or may have goodwill ambassadors who are appointed officially by the UN. The largest of these United Nations programs is UNICEF which has over three hundred (300) ambassadors around the world designated by country or region. The United Nations began using goodwill ambassadors officially to promote their missions in 1954, the first was actor Danny Kaye.

The most famous of today's contemporary goodwill ambassadors is Angelina Jolie, who currently serves professionally as a special envoy to the UNHCR and is legally recognized as "Ambassador Angelina Jolie" in being addressed "Her Excellency Angelina Jolie," whereas most other UN goodwill ambassadors are recognized as "Honorable", and use post-nominal titles that are assigned to them.

UN goodwill ambassadors (official titles)

Victoria Beckham, UNAIDS Goodwill Ambassador

In 2020 and 2021 the United Nations began incorporating official standardized titles of authority for credentials, news releases, their websites and semantically on Wikipedia using the initials of each of the specialized agencies of the United Nations followed by the title "Goodwill Ambassador" or the title/term "Advocate" like it did for the SDG Advocates.

Collectively they are all United Nations goodwill ambassadors, each however is designated with a legal title by each individual agency such as:

FAO Goodwill Ambassador, official title of a goodwill ambassador advocating for the Food and Agricultural Organization

ILO Goodwill Ambassador, public figure or advocate of the International Labour Organization

IMO Goodwill Ambassador, or Goodwill Maritime Ambassador, is an expert or advocate of the International Maritime Organization

IOM Goodwill Ambassador, strategic ally promoting the mandate of the International Organization on Migration

MP Goodwill Ambassador, Mountain Partnership nominates well-known personalities to champion the cause of sustainable mountain development

Stop TB Goodwill Ambassador, advocate for the UN Special Envoy of the UN Partnership to Stop Tuberculosis

UN-Habitat Goodwill Ambassador, advocate of United Nations Habitat commission (urban sustainability)

UN Women Goodwill Ambassador, celebrity advocate for UN Women (UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women)

UNAIDS Goodwill Ambassador, celebrity advocate of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS)

UNDP Goodwill Ambassador, prominent individual that serves the mission of the United Nations Development Programme

UNEP Goodwill Ambassador, public figure or advocate of the United Nations Environmental Programme

UNESCO Goodwill Ambassador, public figure that advocates for UNESCO

UNFPA Goodwill Ambassador, celebrity advocate of the United Nations Population Fund mission

UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador, celebrity advocate of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees'

UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, local, regional and internationally known public figure that is selected to promote the mission of UNICEF

UNIDO Goodwill Ambassador, public figure or expert that advocates for the United Nations Industrial Development Organization mission

UNODC Goodwill Ambassador, celebrity advocate of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime

WFP Goodwill Ambassador, public figure or advocate of the United Nations World Food Programme

WHO Goodwill Ambassador, a celebrity advocate of the World Health Organization

There are other official title designations and forms of presentation that are used by the United Nations depending on the scope of their public relations campaigns, for example in 2021 the term "UNICEF's women Goodwill Ambassadors" appeared for a UNICEF campaign headline for Afghanistan, however this does not change the official title of individual ambassadors. Since 1999, some of the United Nations Diplomatic Corps and United Nations Association Chapters have referred to their ambassadors as Global Goodwill Ambassador or National Goodwill Ambassador of _________. The new guideline of a 3-6 letter alpha code preceding the "Goodwill Ambassador" title makes each ambassador unique with their proper name, disambiguates different UN departments, projects and programs as well as removes assumptions that fraudsters depend on.

Most governments and kingdoms (jurisdictions) have ambassadors of goodwill that are either appointed or known implicitly which promote the objectives and values of a country, nation, state, government or monarchy without promoting political agendas or any official state business. Sometimes "goodwill ambassadors" are created from other ideas that represent, that are positive to social well-being and the general prosperity of a state or nation. The winners of the United States Medal of Freedom are all considered to be goodwill ambassadors for the United States for their lifetime and into history. Being an ambassador of goodwill traditionally includes most individuals competing for a title when a place or organization name is attached, such as winners of prominent scholarships, beauty contests, competitive events and pageants like Miss America, Miss USA, Mister World, Miss Universe, and many others use "goodwill ambassador" as part of their job description.

National goodwill ambassadors are not necessarily celebrities, but are usually very well known on a national scale often within a particular industry for a given period of time. Organizations often use destinations and place names to represent elements, identity, methods, values and virtues of goodwill ambassadorship, however their practice is most often based in public diplomacy, citizen diplomacy or international cooperation.

Official goodwill ambassador representatives of a country, state or nation are designated by the president, prime minister, chancellor, the secretary of state or the head of a cabinet. Governments of countries often recognize the spouse of a president, governor, prime minister or a monarch as goodwill ambassadors such as the First-Lady of the United States, Prince Philip the Duke of Edinburgh for the British Empire, and in the Caribbean country of Belize there is the Special Envoy for Women and Children, all are formally recognized or known as national goodwill ambassadors.

The United States government does not have a formal, active or organized goodwill ambassador program, but it does have many high-profile public figures that have been recognized with the United States Goodwill Ambassador title as individuals. The US periodically organizes official goodwill ambassador tours and also has a number of agencies that assign the title to selected individuals based on talent, expertise and popularity. Some of the more notable U.S. goodwill ambassadors include Jesse Owens, Kirk Douglas, Lefty Gomez, and Pearl Bailey. The United States also designates particular individuals for roles as emissaries abroad when traveling for a special event supported by the U.S., to deliver foreign aid, participate in a conference or to meet a head-of-state such as the appointment of Jillian "JJ" Simmons United States Goodwill Ambassador to the Republic of the Gambia in 2014. Senators and members of the U.S. Congress also have the authority to designate goodwill ambassadors and representatives of USAID are also known as goodwill ambassadors.

In 1956, the US State Department created the Jazz Ambassadors program, hiring leading American jazz musicians such as Louis Armstrong, Dizzy Gillespie, Benny Goodman, and Duke Ellington to be "ambassadors" for the United States overseas, particularly to improve the public image of the US in the light of criticism from the Soviet Union around racial inequality and racial tension.

Appointments in the Caribbean nation of Saint Lucia are very official with an international goodwill ambassador diplomatic corps of the most well-known citizens under the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Creative Industries; the title of Goodwill Ambassador is conveyed by the president on the behalf of the sovereign nation. In 2020, Minister Fortuna Belrose stated that those selected for the Saint Lucia Goodwill Ambassador Program will be addressed as "Your Excellency" and receive a goodwill ambassador credential from the government that they can use when traveling, the term of their office will be three years. Separately the Ministry of Tourism maintains a Saint Lucia brand ambassador program for local hospitality tourism which is also aimed to create good-will for the country.

In 2008 Japan adopted the cartoon character Hello Kitty as their official goodwill tourism ambassador to China and Hong Kong.

Honorary Ambassador of the Republic of Kosovo is a title given to foreign citizens and citizens originating from Kosovo, who have contributed to the national interest of country and use their fame, the award is provided as a state decoration.

A wide range of organizations employ goodwill ambassadors to promote their programs and reach out to others based on goodwill relations and benevolence. There are supra governmental organizations such as the African Union and the European Union and international non-governmental organizations like the IUCN and the IOM. Goodwill ambassadors are also used by social and civil society organizations such as Rotary International, the Olympic Games and the Muscular Dystrophy Association.

The Ambassador of Conscience Award is Amnesty International's most prestigious human rights award. It celebrates individuals and groups who have furthered the cause of human rights by showing exceptional courage standing up to injustice and who have used their talents to inspire others. It also aims to generate debate, encourage public action and raise awareness of inspirational stories and human rights issues.

Numerous governmental and nongovernmental organizations employ goodwill ambassadors following the practice of honoring individuals with awards that denote goodwill ambassador status and roles. Awards are given for good relations, fundraising, acts of philanthropy and recognition for cause advocacy; some examples of such recognition are comedian Trevor Noah who received a South African Goodwill Ambassador Award in 2015, actress Alex Okoroji who received a Nigeria Goodwill Ambassador Award in 2017, and the Steve Irwin Memorial Goodwill Ambassador Award which was established in 2007. The former First Lady of Nigeria, Patience Jonathan, became a goodwill ambassador after receiving the African Goodwill Ambassador Award in Los Angeles in 2008.

Culture, customs and traditions

Since "goodwill" is an intangible asset it often needs a custodian in a culture that can conservatively emulate themselves in a social order to garner respect for the institutions of the state, nation or kingdom to advance civil society. This has given rise to organizations with specifically designated authorities like the Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices (IAC) which uses current and former first ladies to preserve and protect traditional indigenous culture.

Many national states or provincial regions use goodwill ambassadors to promote tourism, economic development, traditional values, customs and cultural ideals that contribute to their recognition. US states have civil service recognition programs that designate goodwill ambassadors honorarily and officially who are responsible for promoting tourism, events and the prosperity of the state in general. The oldest example of this is the Kentucky Colonel, which is the highest award bestowed by the state's governor, officially established in 1895, the honorable title is given to civilians based on performing a great deed, community service or for accomplishing a noteworthy achievement that deserves recognition. The distinction of Kentucky colonel entitles the recipient to "discharge their duties" with the honorable title as a "colonel" and is denoted through the issuance of letters patent with the official dutiful designation as a good-will ambassador. Other US states also have similar civilian awards that denote the role of goodwill ambassador which are well-recognized, including that of the Tennessee Colonel, Rhode Island Commodore, Nebraska Admiral, Order of the Longleaf Pine, Arkansas Traveler, Yellow Rose of Texas, and Sagamore of the Wabash.

There are many types of people that may be considered goodwill ambassadors representative to their local area for a short-time or over many years, informally, unofficially or by name. From a diplomatic perspective, the only difference in many cases is "who, under what authority, confirmed the appointment or commission to a post or mission based ambassadorship" with international protocol. Civilian goodwill ambassadors most often are not designated with an official appointment document from a head of state, granted letters patent, the honorable title or an officer commission; but this does not make them any less goodwill ambassadors. The term goodwill ambassador of an organization or ambassador of goodwill could be used for a company, an association, a local nonprofit, an event, a cause, an indigenous tribe, or a small city with a population of 50 to describe a representative; the difference and distinction of how and when to use the descriptive term as a professional title, position, role or occupation or to let it serve a part a job description is up to the person writing. Generally a goodwill ambassador can be anyone demonstrating benevolence on the part of someone else professionally, it can also be used in a community or informal sense.

There are many programs and objectives that include the term "goodwill ambassador" which are executed at a local levels for those who wish to pursue a career or define themselves using the term as a "goodwill ambassador". There are a number of cities that have exemplary permanent and established goodwill ambassador programs including New York City, Dallas, Los Angeles, and Miami-Dade, Florida.

The term goodwill ambassador should be clearly distinguished from the relative concept of a brand ambassador, who plays a role in promoting a company, organization or product through personal interaction. Under the idea of brand ambassador other concepts converge such as a tourism ambassador, honorifically in name locally for an organization or for someone such as the spokesman for the local fire department that goes out to talk to school children, who serves as a goodwill ambassador in his/her own right as a fireman.

Universities often call campus ambassadors with different and varied roles, goodwill ambassadors.

There are many individuals and organizations that use the term competitively for recognition, despite not having been granted a commission, being licensed to use the mark Goodwill Ambassador as a title, or receiving the honorable title through an official appointment. Apparently many simply use the term because it appeals to them often causing confusion with other organizations that use legally designated goodwill ambassadors. Sometimes being recognized as a goodwill ambassador within an organization or on its own is perceived as an accomplishment in itself and not an actual role, or if a role, not a title. Organizations most likely are legally and morally responsible for the conduct of its title holders and use of the honorable title after their name as if they were employees or legal representatives.

Social media based network formations such as the LinkedIn goodwill ambassadors established in 2014 by Richard DiPilla led to confusion, when he recognized thousands upon thousands of professionals around the world as humanitarians with a digital computer award certificate conferring recognition as a "Global Goodwill Ambassador" based on the career and volunteer related information they have provided about themselves using their public LinkedIn profiles. The network, which claims over 17,000 goodwill ambassadors became an organization in subsequent years called the Global Goodwill Ambassadors Foundation (GGAF) based in Minnesota, DiPilla started a website and sought 501(c)(3) status. Because of the number of award recipients' assimilation of similar descriptive roles occupied by representatives associated with the United Nations, the organization's commemorative LinkedIn ambassadors have caused a great deal of ambiguity and confusion with official UNICEF Global Goodwill Ambassadors, an official UN Women Global Goodwill Ambassador, a Global Goodwill Ambassador for the World Food Program, the Global Goodwill Ambassador organization in New York, the Lamar University Global Goodwill Ambassadors Program and the Global Goodwill Ambassador Awards of 2016 in Nigeria. The organization's name, the number of awards that use the term, and number of people that received the award naturally diminish the efforts and messages of the original prior users of the term " Global Goodwill Ambassador" making them less effective when using the relevant words together to represent their identity in public relations campaigns, in the news, on the Internet, on Facebook, Twitter and on the world stage to carry out their official missions.

Unlike official designations granted by UN Women, UNICEF, UNHCR or other United Nations organizations which require an official designation, LinkedIn ambassadorships from the GGAF: do not require previous experience as an ambassador; are not developed to provide diplomatic credence; are not conferred by a head of state; do not represent a legal authority; do not obligate recipients to a legitimate commission; and do not regulate any official duty that can be recognized or understood by other states as a diplomatic post or an honorable title.

Andrew F. Cooper and Louise Frechette. Celebrity Diplomacy, London: Taylor & Francis, 2015. ISBN 9781317262701.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Goodwill ambassador is a post-nominal honorific title, a professional occupation and/or authoritative designation that is assigned to a person who advocates for a specific cause or global issue on the basis of their notability such as a public figure, advocate or an authoritative expert.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Horror films and their monsters are designed to scare us, but for Chinese-Australian artist, Louise Zhang, rather than being fearful, instead they are her comfort and safe space. In this talk, she shares her deep passion for cinema horror as an art form and explores the idea of the monster and the monstrous as a way to exorcise her anxieties through art.
Louise Zhang is a Chinese-Australian artist based in Sydney, Australia. Spanning painting, sculpture and installation, her work negates the space between the attractive and repulsive. With an interest in horror cinema, particularly body horror, Zhang investigates the idea of the visceral as medium, method and symbol in negotiating horror as art form.

Zhang graduated with a Masters of Fine Arts by Research at UNSW Art & Design (formally COFA) in 2016. She recently completely residency programs at the Institute of Provocation, Beijing (Australia Council) and at Organhaus, Chongqing (China Residencies and Copyright Council) centring her research around the construct of diyu (Chinese hell).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What horror monsters can tell us about ourselves? | Louise Zhang - TEDxSydney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Horror films and their monsters are designed to scare us, but for Chinese-Australian artist, Louise Zhang, rather than being fearful, instead they are her comfort and safe space. In this talk, she shares her deep passion for cinema horror as an art form and explores the idea of the monster and the monstrous as a [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It doesn't seem enough to call Stephen Paddock, who killed 58 innocent people in Las Vegas this month, a monster. The term has lost its power to evoke the unimaginable. The beasts that terrorized the mental lives of our ancestors have been tamed by religion and culture, notes Stephen T. Asma this week in a Nautilus essay, " Why Are So Many Monsters Hybrids? ". So what do we call Paddock?

Asma, a professor of philosophy at Columbia College Chicago, and author, most recently, of On Monsters and The Evolution of Imagination, says the term "monster" is not ready to be retired. The moniker suits Paddock, he says. "Monster is a term we reserve for people who cannot be negotiated with. It's almost impossible, if not impossible, to understand their behavior, their motives, their mind. Our regular theory of mind doesn't work on these people."

Mandel Ngan, Ed Jones / AFP / Getty Images

In a ranging interview with Nautilus about mythic and real monsters, Asma talked about the evolutionary origin of werewolves and the psychological fears that give rise to tyrannous leaders. Asma lived in Cambodia for a while and learned about the monstrous rule of Pol Pot. He offered his view of what appeals to Americans about Donald Trump. We delved into the roles that desire and repulsion play in our conceptions of monsters, and why he disagrees with neuroscientist Lisa Feldman Barrett about the source of emotions.

Given the strange and gruesome tales in his chosen field of study-"You definitely want to wait until you have tenure before you write a book on monsters," the philosophy professor says wryly-Asma was invariably amiable in conversation. He is the cheerful amanuensis of humanity's darkest fears.
What is a monster?
It's from a Latin word, monstrare, to warn. If you look at early uses of the term and concept, particularly in Greek and Roman cultures, it was applied to something like a baby born as a conjoined twin or missing a limb or with extra limbs. These were thought to be monsters. The Greeks called them teratos. They thought they were horrifying punishments for immoral activity-a theme the medieval Christians jumped on and articulated. It was a sign that things were going to be bad for the state, or for this particular emperor, or this particular battle. It's a mix of natural calamity and supernatural significance.
Are monsters a manifestation of repulsion?
Yes, there's always an emotional or affective component to it. An interesting philosopher named Noel Carroll argues that when you look at monsters, particularly modern monsters of horror genres, you'll see they're oozing slime or have extra appendages and tentacles. There's something violating our sense of bodily barriers or bodily limits. That tends to activate the disgust emotion. That's also why monsters are so useful politically. When a culture is about to go to war it demonizes or monsterizes the other group. That requires casting them as uncivilized and disgusting. You target their sexual hygiene, for example. You target them as objects of disgust.

The term "monster" still does good work when you get to somebody like the Las Vegas killer Stephen Paddock.

So in sociological terms, monsters are the "out group"?
Right, you're different from us. There's a xenophobia running through the whole history of monsters. If you're different from us, we'll have a disgust-response or will be afraid and on guard. You see that in the ancient world. You see it through the medieval period and all the way up to the present, in the way we cast our enemies.
Did religion play a role in the concept of monsters?
Religion never just builds a pantheon of gods. It always builds the gods as the response to a threat structure, which is going to be a monster story of some kind. If you look at the earliest stories, whether it's in Hindu, Chinese, or Mesopotamian literature, like Gilgamesh, you always confront a monster-hero or hero-monster. This must be part of an adaptive strategy for building fictive kin groups. How do you get cooperative groups among large numbers of people who aren't blood relations? You've got to have these narratives.
Do monsters have an adaptive function?
From the point of view of evolution, casting others as monsters would have been extremely adaptive and helpful to your own survival as a group. Nature was not a warm and fuzzy place. Some of these horror stories were helpful in getting you to be nervous about real predators-both non-human animals and human predators. The traditional werewolf story was very strong in Europe. That makes sense because wolves in northern Europe, as they evolved, were a predator for Europeans. There's a werebear tradition in the Americas because Native Americans were worried about real bears and violence through bear predation or bear attacks. If you look at the monsters of these ecologies or environments, you'll see they share a transformational function. The animal that you can become, or that you should be afraid of, is the local predator.
You write there's another side to the story. What's that?
It's an interesting thread that doesn't get a lot of attention. It's not xenophobic but xenocurious. A classic example is from St. Augustine. He knows monsters are supposed to be living in Africa and the East. This includes Cyclops; the cynocephali, the dog-headed men; and the blemmyes, which had no head, but their face appears in their chest. Everybody thinks these monsters are evil incarnate, the children of Cain, stake them in the heart, that's the end of it. But Augustine stresses the "wondrous" aspects of these creatures. He says, "These guys are scary, but if we can talk to them, and they demonstrate some kind of rationality, they might be capable of being saved, they could be part of redemption."
How's this tradition been passed down over the years?
It's the project of Western liberalism to increase the circles of tolerance to those who are different from you. From the modern liberal point of view, having disgust toward strangers is a terrible thing. You shouldn't monsterize or demonize others, you shouldn't feel disgust toward them. That's one way to interpret Frankenstein. When they teach Frankenstein in high schools, they teach it as a way to show that you create aggression and violence by not welcoming difference into your group. It's a liberal interpretation of the monster. The monster is not evil. What the monster needs is a hug, understanding, and rational negotiation.

When did monster become a term for a person?
That's a really interesting issue. There's a few threads we could trace. One is from the ancient Greeks, who had a notion of monstrous desire. You could have a desire in you that was so overwhelming that it would alienate you from yourself. The reason why Medea kills her children, the reason why this person slays that person, or love drives you insane, is because Eros made you do monstrous things. It was a possession from within. It's a psychological ability that you failed to educate properly. I think that thread goes all the way to Freud and the idea of an id being who we are deep down. There's a part of us all that has to be carefully managed. Otherwise it does psychopathological actions. You see this now with the Las Vegas shooter. We want to know why he did it. Is there some part of ourselves that if we don't manage it correctly, it could, in fact, lead us to some kinds of behaviors like this?
Would you call Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas killer, a monster?
Yes. And that's where the term "monster" still does good work. It applies to a category of monster we can't understand. It's like, "I can't even process this. This makes no sense to me."
How does the term "monster" do good work?
A lot of people think, "Well, a monster is an old word that needs to go away entirely, and what you have to do is understand people and what makes them tick." I'm of the view that monster just still does good work as a term when you get to somebody like Stephen Paddock. One of the things about a monster is that it's not someone you can negotiate with rationally. You might find common ground with an enemy. Maybe your enemy hates you. Maybe it's economically based. Monster is a term we reserve for people who cannot be negotiated with. It's almost impossible, if not impossible, to understand their behavior, their motives, their mind. Our regular theory of mind doesn't work on these people. Monster has negative connotations, and that has to be talked about. But in this case it's perfectly appropriate to use it.
Do we simply have to be content with the fact that human beings can be monstrous?
It's a hard question. I interviewed a judge who's spent the last 30 years dealing with some of the most heinous criminals that we read about in the newspaper. The same goes for my brother, who's an investigator for a public defender. Both have told me that when you're interviewing somebody who's been arrested for killing his children or some other horrible act, once you start talking with him, it becomes very hard to see them as monsters.

I remember my brother telling me about this guy who's supposed to be a monster. After a few hours, they get onto music. It turns out they have common music tastes. Maybe they share a smoke. All of a sudden you're in this human relation with them that is natural. That really modifies this tendency to see this person as just a monster.

I think every person is capable of committing monstrous acts, but true monsters are quite rare.

The judge made this distinction. He said, "I think their actions are monstrous, but I don't think of the person as monstrous." I think the law makes a further distinction. There's a category in jurisprudence where they say, "OK, you got drunk or high on something, and been angry and then committed some horrible murder."

There's another category of person recognized in U.S. common law with this wonderful term, which sounds very 19th-century; they say this person has a "malignant heart." That's actually a legal term, since it is part of the common law definition of "malice" and appears in the California Penal Code. It means it's a character issue. This person intends and possibly enjoys the pain of another person. I think it's interesting the law recognizes that there's some people who are just rotten and have to be contained. They didn't just have a monstrous moment or commit a monstrous act. These are the monsters.
But can we separate a person from his or her actions? There's only one brain behind both.
Yeah, these are folk categories, I guess. But folk categories often dominate in the law. On the other hand, if I just go the route of neuroscience, I can see myself quickly tipping toward determinism. If we went into somebody like Stephen Paddock's brain, are we going to find a tumor? The fact that no other motive is popping up might make me tilt in that direction. Perhaps there was something like this. The jury's still out. We need more information.

But you're right: Is there a sense in which a heinous activity can't be separated out from the person, or the person can't be separated out from the sum of their actions? On the other hand, we do need some distinction between somebody who does something in a state of temporary loss of self control vs. somebody who is premeditating and working out in detail some nefarious act. That's why terms like "character" still do good work in the humanities. In terms of neuroscience, yeah, there isn't going to be a separate homunculus in the brain, but there might be some story to be told about failures of the impulse control system.
Do you think every human being is capable of being monstrous?
I think every person is capable of committing monstrous acts, but true monsters are quite rare. Our Darwinian inheritance provides all of us with adaptive forms of aggression, but the nurture of caregivers and cultural education tempers and domesticates our predatory tendencies. Failures of parenting and cultural education, together with brain anomalies, are usually in the background of psychopathic personalities. Having said that, certain ideologies like jihadism or imperialism can re-educate an otherwise compassionate person into a monster. Bad ideas can redirect our pro-social emotions, and create a malignant heart.
Who or what's responsible for monstrous leaders?
There's something about the tyrannical man that's attractive to people who feel under threat, or in a body politic that feels under threat. You see this time and again. Sociologists and anthropologists call it the "big-man phenomenon." A lot of them agree that when a group feels under threat and their basic needs are not being met, a really charismatic, tyrannical person rises to the top. You saw this with Hitler. You saw it with Stalin. I've lived in Cambodia and know a lot about the Khmer Rouge story and Pol Pot. But even Plato said the same thing in The Republic.

What's interesting is it's hard to critique, or counterweight, because the tyrant, or monstrous leader, only has to be aggressive. That's his whole job. If you complain that he's irrational or not making sense, or hard to cooperate with, it doesn't matter. Those are the "virtues" of the monstrous leader. Take Donald Trump's thing with "Little Rocket Man," as he now calls Kim Jong-un. The appeal of Trump, I think, for his supporters, is Trump now looks crazy, and so maybe other big men, big chiefs, will recognize and respect another crazy man. This could actually have a deterrent effect. It could also be part of the explanation of why a monstrous leader stays in power.

Wikipedia

What do you mean when you write monsters have a moral purpose?
Monsters can be part of the moral imagination as a way to define what we don't want to be. An obvious case would be a jihadi, who cuts off the head of a journalist. But there's also subtle permutations like Ebenezer Scrooge. Our literature and culture creates icons of immorality, and they help shape our behavior and our thinking. A lot of people enjoy horror like The Walking Dead because it's a form of rehearsal. I'm not expecting a zombie apocalypse, but I do wonder what would happen if the grid went down and we had no electricity and suddenly there's a food shortage. What would happen if modern society came to some screeching halt? Many of the monster scenarios would be a surrogate training for what could happen between human beings.
What is your monster?
I'm afraid of deep or murky water. It's almost a paralyzing fear because I fear sea monsters, which is an utterly irrational and ridiculous fear. It's made me wonder what's going on.
So, what's going on?
When you study philosophy, there's this bias in the field against irrationality. Once it works out the kinks, rationality is supposed to be the great light of the psyche. It shines in and clarifies supernaturalism and irrational fears. All you have to do is train your mind well and you'll be able to clean out the basement of the psyche using the bright light of reason. I began to realize that is just not right. Reason is not the great operating system. It is built on a much bigger and older operating system, which is the emotional operating system. There's a lot of research showing that rational or cognitive behavioral therapy does little to help people get over real, debilitating phobias. It really appears to be something else or something deeper.

Ultimately the story of fear, phobia, and horror has to be rooted in ancient emotional systems.

What's the seat of that paralyzing fear?
I think the full story will not be told for another decade or two, but I do think work by affective neuroscientists like the late Jaak Panksepp, Antonio Damasio, Kent Berridge, and Richard Davidson, is getting us there. These thinkers believe there's an innate emotional wiring that is flexible enough to grab onto different things and experience. I think that view is right, although it's currently under critique by people like Lisa Feldman Barrett. But I really disagree with her theory of constructed emotions. I think she's way too up in the conceptual space of the mind.
Her view is emotions aren't readymade circuits in the brain triggered by experiences. They're constructions, the brain's way of making sense of the world.
Yeah, and I think what she's describing makes sense for a certain domain of mental life, namely a rarefied human domain of mental life. But I'm too much of a Darwinian about the mind to think this is how most of our emotions happen. There are more subtle kinds of emotions, the sense of angst or ennui, or other language based emotions, that might fit well with Barrett's view. But I think, homologously, we share basic affective systems with other mammals. She denies this and that's where I just disagree. She intellectualizes emotions so much-seeing them as concepts-that she cannot explain animal emotion or emotion in babies. Ultimately, the story of fear, phobia, and horror has to be rooted in the more ancient emotional systems.
How did monsters lead you to writing about imagination?
I'd been thinking a lot about images. Long before we had written language and stories, we had images in our brains as a result of perception. We must have been engaging in a kind of communication with images and with bodily gestures before we had language. This got me thinking about how old the imagination is. Is it something that comes along after language, or were we able to communicate with images long before we had language? I feel like there are many ways of having knowledge and communicating with others that's non-linguistic, that has to do with body gesture, in the form of dance, or in the course of drawing or imagery, like cave paintings at Lascaux or Chauvet. There's a whole language of the imagination and a life of the mind that preexisted propositional thinking.
Does that ancient imaginative life still exist within us?
My view is we still have it, yes. It's obscured by the dominance of propositional thinking. We're very executively organized in our brains now. That's what you're doing when you raise a kid. You're sculpting a neocortical operating system over the mishmash of much more associational motor perceptual processes. We're all taught how to discipline our minds just like we're taught to discipline our behavior. But we can, in the course of creative activities like the arts, shut off that neocortical editor and take little field trips to this earlier form of mind.
What would you be if you weren't a philosophy professor?
I'm torn because my allegiances are equally divided between music and visual art, but I would definitely be some kind of an artist. I still am an artist. I just don't get paid much for it anymore.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why We Still Need Monsters - Issue 53: Monsters - Nautilus

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It doesn't seem enough to call Stephen Paddock, who killed 58 innocent people in Las Vegas this month, a monster. The term has lost its power to evoke the unimaginable. The beasts that terrorized the mental lives of our ancestors have been tamed by religion and culture, notes Stephen T.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two new monster movies are being released in the lead-up to Christmas, and each sports a very different kind of beast. There's the man-made creation of Victor Frankenstein in the latest rendition of Mary Shelley's gothic tale, a grotesque creature cobbled together from "the dissecting room and the slaughter-house". And then there's Krampus, an American re-working of the evil Austrian counterpart to Father Christmas.

The word "monster", as this shows, covers all manner of things. Man-made, such as Frankenstein, folkloric demons such as Krampus, and then there are also the classical images of exotic peoples with no heads or grotesquely exaggerated features, or the kinds of impossible chimerical beasts inhabiting the pages of medieval bestiaries.

The etymology of monstrosity suggests the complex roles that monsters play within society. "Monster" probably derives from the Latin, monstrare, meaning "to demonstrate", and monere, "to warn".

So monsters, in essence, are demonstrative. They reveal, portend, show and make evident, often uncomfortably so. How they have been created over the centuries is much more indicative of the moral and existential challenges faced by societies than the realities that they have encountered. Though the modern Gothic monster and the medieval chimera may seem unrelated, both have acted as important social tools.

Fox UK

Early modern monsters

Until relatively recently in history, monsters close to home, such as deformed babies or two-headed calves, were construed as warnings of divine wrath. Monstrous depictions in newspapers and pamphlets expressed strong political attitudes. Traditional monstrous beasts such as basilisks or unicorns, that were banished to distant regions in maps, represented a frightening unknown: "here be dragons" effectively filled cartographic voids.

Simultaneously, however, monsters represented the wonderful diversity of divine creation, a playful "Nature" that produced a multitude of strange forms. Exotic beasts brought to Europe for the first time in the 16th century, such as armadillos or walruses, were often interpreted as "monstrous". More accurately, they were made into monsters when they were defined as such: as things that did not fit into the accepted natural categories. An armadillo became a pig-turtle, while a walrus was a sea-elephant.

Beasts that subverted what was expected in some way actually reinforced categories by clarifying the defining criteria for these groups. By transgressing, they helped to determine boundaries. Because to define a deviant form, such as a "deformed" baby or calf, or a "monstrous" exotic creature, you have to define "normal".

For example, the simple definition of a "bird" was something that had two legs, two wings, could fly and walk. Then two new creatures arrived in the 16th century that seemed to violate this definition. First, birds of paradise were brought to Europe in 1622 as trade skins with stunning, colourful plumes but no legs or wings. Their limbs were removed by the hunters who supplied the birds in New Guinea. The birds were interpreted by European naturalists as heavenly creatures that never landed, inhabiting the boundary between the avian and the angelic.

Johnston

At the other end of the avian spectrum, Dutch sailors landing on Mauritius at the end of the 16th century encountered dodos. Though rarely brought to Europe physically, the descriptions and detached parts of dodos were used by naturalists to depict ungainly, fat birds. Not only did dodos not fly, they could hardly walk.

The dodo was therefore depicted as vast and gluttonous in late 17th-century accounts. It greedily consumed everything it came across, even hot coals. It was described as nauseatingly greasy to eat: one bird could apparently feed 25 men. This image was created by writers who had never seen the bird, and is not supported by current paleobiological evidence. The idea of the avian glutton embodied European anxieties about the rapacious colonial trading activities in the Indian Ocean, which brought a surfeit of riches to Europe. The engorged dodo became a scapegoat for the European sin of gluttony.

Monsters, therefore, are not self-evident; they are created to serve certain roles. Making things monstrous also added value. They became commercially lucrative things: oddities, curiosities and rare things were very marketable.

The market for monstrosity further motivated the literal creation of monsters: "mermaids" were assembled from pieces of fish, monkeys and other objects while "ray-dragons" were created from carefully mutilated and dried rays. These objects could be sold to collectors or displayed in menageries and freak-shows. Writing about and portraying virtual monsters helped to sell books and pamphlets.

Modern-day monsters

So how do we use our monsters today? One of the two monsters set to hit cinemas displays the dangers of hubristic human enterprise (Victor Frankenstein); the other provides a dark embodiment of Christmas-spirit gone awry (Krampus). Such monsters are images that embody the cultural or psychological characteristics that we as a society find difficult to acknowledge. By excising them, through fantastical narratives, we rid ourselves of the undesirable attributes they are perceived to carry. The cathartic consumption of monster-culture provides us with a safe, removed space to explore and excise social anxieties.

It also offers the illusion of absolution from them by externalising anxieties into ridiculous figures, such as Krampus. Monsters such as this proffer us pastiches of moral messages in easily-swallowed forms that both highlight their potential threat, and soothe us by defusing it.

Though it may not seem so, this has always been the most important role that monsters have played: they horrify us, yes, but ultimately their function is to remove what we find horrifying about ourselves. So we can recoil at the gory construction of Frankenstein's monster, or shriek at the toothy maw of Krampus for a few hours, then leave them happily behind when the credits roll.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Frankenstein or Krampus? What our monsters say about us

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two new monster movies are being released in the lead-up to Christmas, and each sports a very different kind of beast. There's the man-made creation of Victor Frankenstein in the latest rendition of Mary Shelley's gothic tale, a grotesque creature cobbled together from "the dissecting room and the slaughter-house".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A giant kraken rising from the oceans, the Medusa of ancient myths, blood-thirsty vampires, brain-eating zombies - we've long been drawn to tales of terrifying monsters.

But these fictional creatures may be a little more real than you think.

They tend to reflect the power dynamics, prejudices and fears of a society, and the people in it.

"It comes back to the idea that a monster arises from society's very deepest fears," says Liz Gloyn, who lectures in classical literature at London's Royal Holloway University.

"The shape is defined by what a culture is scared of."

Listen to the episode

The monsters we create say a lot about ourselves and our society. Listen as Big Ideas explores why.

This fear, Professor Gloyn explains, takes many forms but often blurs the line between fantasy and reality.

Ancient Greek and Roman monsters like the minotaur were inspired by xenophobic fears, while Medieval characters stemmed from supernatural themes in Christian theology.

"The Romans thought they were the gods telling people what needed to be done - ways of averting God's disfavour," she says.

She says monsters can take many shapes, but tend to fall into two categories.

"We can be frightened of the uncategorised which doesn't fit into the neat box, like Frankenstein's monster which is half dead, half alive," she says.

"Or it can be the unfamiliar, the present 'other'.

"The monster can constantly reshape itself to haunt the culture that is using it - not just the culture that created it."

The boundary between life and death

The Age of the Enlightenment in the 1700s and 1800s saw massive political and scientific reform, and brought with it a whole new set of fears.

European politics, philosophy and science were radically revolutionised, and thinkers across Britain embraced the notion that intellectual reasoning had more value than traditional authority.

With that came haunted castles, rotting corpses and the grotesque creations of mad scientists in the form of Gothic Literature.

"Monsters were the ultimate emblem of the uneasy borderline separating what science can do and what it should do," says Evan Hayles Gledhill, from the University of Reading.

"They reanimated the boundaries between life and death ... crossing medical, religious and legal boundaries."

The more medically advanced society became, the more people worried that technology had gone too far - that science was going to give us animal-human hybrids and reanimated corpses like Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.

For Gledhill, Frankenstein still serves as a constant reminder of human fragility in the face of disease.

"The bolts on Frankenstein's neck are similar to surgical support. They are not that much different from a pacemaker or bionic arm," they say.

"He doesn't fit in and he doesn't know how to behave like other people do. This is something that really echoes for a lot of people.

"It touches on lots of things that affect us all daily: disability, race, gender, who gets to be fully human.

"We're afraid - not just of what other people look like, differently, but of what's inside us. We don't have a lot of control over that."

Vampires like Dracula, can also be linked to fear and paranoia within society.

"With Dracula, his appearance is suggestive of something not quite right and some people read into that queerness or racial suggestiveness," Gledhill says.

On screen, vampires are traditionally portrayed by suave, attractive actors.

"So we have this creepy, incestuous miscegenation idea with the wrong people seducing [other] people," they say.

Vampires can also be an expression of paranoia about disease, blood and dehumanisation.

For example, in the 1980s, during the AIDS epidemic, there was a spike in the popularity of vampire films.

"We can link our monsters to reality very directly in this way," Gledhill says.

Fears of nuclear war have inspired fictional monsters including Godzilla, which embraced collective anxieties surrounding Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the 1940s.

Produced only nine years after the horrific bombings that killed upward of 300,000 people and ended World War II, Godzilla was a cathartic exploration of invasion on home soil.

The zombie, meanwhile, has been used as a metaphor for racial sublimation, communism, mass contagion and globalism - and in recent years emerged as an expression of fear about Ebola.

In 2014, a conspiracy theory surfaced online titled "Africa confirms third Ebola victim rises from the dead", with a "confirmed picture" of the so-called zombie.

The picture was quickly revealed to be a doctored image from the film World War Z and the story was debunked as a hoax - but only after being shared thousands of times.

The link between fear and empathy

Jeremy Skipper, the director of the Language, Action and Brain Lab at University College London, says the relationship between fear and empathy is lot closer than we realise.

"There's a series of regions that are involved in what we call 'theory of mind processing' which is the ability to put yourself in the shoes of the character," he explains.

"These regions are engaged all the time when people are processing social information and they're really engaged with empathising."

When it comes to scary movies and novels, he says the neurological circuits related to fear and empathy may be engaged at the same time.

"Fiction - whatever form it is, activates the same networks in your brain as they do in real life," he says.

"The take home point is that Frankenstein's monster is compelling because it not only engages fear circuitry, it engages circuitry involved with empathy.

"You really empathise with the plight of Frankenstein's monster."

Our fears morph with the times, but they're ever-present - so it seems monsters won't be dying off any time soon, either.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From vampires to zombies, the monsters we create say a lot about us

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A giant kraken rising from the oceans, the Medusa of ancient myths, blood-thirsty vampires, brain-eating zombies - we've long been drawn to tales of terrifying monsters. But these fictional creatures may be a little more real than you think. They tend to reflect the power dynamics, prejudices and fears of a society, and the people in it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What do we mean when we talk about 'monsters'? The word conjures up figures from gothic horror, such as Frankenstein or Dracula, classical images of exotic peoples with no heads or grotesquely exaggerated features, and the kinds of impossible chimerical beasts inhabiting the pages of medieval bestaries. How monsters have been created over the centuries is much more indicative of the moral and existential challenges faced by societies than the realities that they have encountered.

The etymology of monstrosity suggests the complex roles that monsters play within society. 'Monster' probably derives from the Latin, monstrare, meaning 'to demonstrate', and monere, 'to warn'. Monsters, in essence, are demonstrative. They reveal, portend, show and make evident, often uncomfortably so. Though the modern gothic monster and the medieval chimaera may seem unrelated, both have acted as important social tools.

Dr Walter Palmer, who illegally shot Cecil the Lion in Zimbabwe, has been labeled a 'monster'. Given the moniker 'The Dentist', he has had to resign from his practice, flee his home, and hire armed guards to protect himself and his family as a result of public disgust at his actions. He has even received death threats and been described as 'barely human'. Trophy hunting, and anyone who takes part in or has involvement with it, has been similarly vilified in the media and by animal rights groups.

Such public 'monsters' serve a similar role to gothic monsters, images that embody the cultural or psychological characteristics that we as a society find difficult to acknowledge. By excising them, through fantasies of execution or simply professional exclusion, we rid ourselves of the undesirable attributes they are perceived to carry. The 'murdered' lion becomes the innocent white-robed victim of the archetypal gothic tale, while murderous 'Dentist' plays the role of social scapegoat.

Until relatively recently in history, monsters close to home, such as deformed babies or two-headed calves, were construed as warnings of divine wrath. Monstrous depictions in newspapers and pamphlets expressed strong political attitudes. The monstrous races or traditional monstrous beasts such as basilisks or unicorns, that were banished to distant regions in maps, represented a frightening unknown: 'here be dragons' effectively filled cartographic voids.

Simultaneously, however, monsters represented the wonderful diversity of divine creation, a playful 'Nature' that could produce a multitude of strange forms. Exotic beasts brought to Europe for the first time in the 16th century, such as armadillos or walruses, were often interpreted as 'monstrous'. More accurately, they were made into monsters: things that did not fit into the accepted natural categories. An armadillo became a pig-turtle, while a walrus was a fish-ox.

It might seem counter-intuitive, but beasts that seemingly mixed the characteristics of different natural groups were not troubling. Rather, they reinforced categories by clarifying the defining criteria for these groups. By transgressing, they helped to determine boundaries. To define a deviant form, such as a 'deformed' baby or calf, or a 'monstrous' exotic creature, you have to define 'normal'.

For example, the simple Aristotelian definition of a 'bird' was something that had two legs, two wings, could fly and walk. Two new creatures arrived in the 16th century that seemed to violate this definition. Firstly, birds of paradise were brought to Europe in 1622 as trade skins with stunning, colourful plumes but no legs or wings. Their limbs were removed by the hunters who supplied the birds in New Guinea. The birds were interpreted by European naturalists as heavenly creatures that never landed, inhabiting the boundary between the avian and the angelic.

At the other end of the avian spectrum, Dutch sailors landing on Mauritius at the end of the 16th century encountered dodos. Though rarely brought to Europe physically, the descriptions and detached parts of dodos were used by naturalists to depict ungainly, fat birds. Not only did dodos not fly, they could hardly walk. Lacking the typical feathers and wings of other birds, they were almost mammalian in form.

Monsters are not self-evident; they were created to serve these roles. Even beautiful creatures like the birds of paradise could become monsters due to their lack of limbs and imagined ascetic lifestyles. Making monsters added value. They were commercially lucrative things: oddities, curiosities and rare things were very marketable.

The market for monstrosity motivated the literal creation of monsters: 'mermaids' were assembled from pieces of fish, monkeys and other objects while 'ray-dragons' were created from carefully mutilated and dried rays. These objects could be sold to collectors or displayed in menageries and freak-shows. Writing about and portraying virtual monsters helped to sell books and pamphlets.

The tale of Cecil and 'The Dentist' is not so different. It is certainly highly saleable, as details about this particular monster's life and activities provide valuable fodder for media outlets.

Animal monsters could have very specific roles. The dodo, for example, was depicted as vast and gluttonous in late 17th-century accounts. It greedily consumed everything it came across, even hot coals. It was described as nauseatingly greasy to eat: one bird could apparently feed 25 men. This image was created by writers who had never seen the bird, and is not supported by current paleobiological evidence.

The idea of the avian glutton embodied European anxieties about the rapacious colonial trading activities in the Indian Ocean, which brought a surfeit of riches to Europe. The engorged dodo became a scapegoat for the European sin of gluttony.

What catharsis does the 'monsterification' of Palmer and other trophy hunters provide? Perhaps focusing on the tragedy of one 'personality' lion distracts from the greater horrors of illegal poaching and human-animal conflict occurring in similar regions. It also masks the fact that, though controversial, regulated commercial hunting is an important source of conservation funding in many countries.

On the one hand, excising this monster reinforces our conceptions of social boundaries of morality: don't kill creatures we perceive as having human traits, like names or personalities. On the other, it offers the illusion of absolution from the underlying horror at what all of us are doing to the natural world.
Inset images: The 'Monster of Cracow', a monstrous creature born to honourable parents, from Pierre Boaistuau's 'Histoires Prodigieuses' (1560, Paris) (Wellcome Library, London); 'Draco alter ex raia' or a ray-dragon from Ulysse Aldrovandi's 'Serpentum et draconum historiæ' (1640, Bologna), p.316.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
natalie lawrence natalie lawrence gothic art

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
morality department of history and philosophy of science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
school of the humanities and social sciences department of history and philosophy of science

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
school of the humanities and social sciences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What do we mean when we talk about 'monsters'? The word conjures up figures from gothic horror, such as Frankenstein or Dracula, classical images of exotic peoples with no heads or grotesquely

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Whereas the 1940s has long been hailed as a 'golden age' for British cinema, the preceding decade has been viewed largely with disdain; the likes of Alfred Hitchcock and Alexander Korda have been seen to offer sporadic oases of cinematic quality in a desert of mediocrity. This abiding image, however, is neither complete nor accurate.

One major reason for prejudice is the perceived preponderance throughout the greater part of the 1930s of the so-called 'quota quickie', films made with the lowest possible budgets simply to fulfil the recently introduced quota obligations imposed on distributors and exhibitors by the Cinematograph Films Act of 1927. One of the aims of a replacement Act in 1938 was to eradicate such films by the introduction of a minimum production cost requirement, but although the term'quota quickie' may have consequently disappeared from popular discourse, the films themselves arguably prevailed.

Cheap and quickly shot these films may have been, but many still warrant interest, among them Tod Slaughter's essays in lip-smacking villainy, beginning with Maria Marten or Murder in the Red Barn (d. Milton Rosmer, 1935); the heartfelt social dramas of John Baxter, such as Doss House (1933); and some excellent thrillers from director Bernard Vorhaus, including the striking The Last Journey (1936).

As well as providing valuable experience for young acting talent such as John Mills, James Mason and Jack Hawkins, these low-budget films also offered opportunities to behind-the-screen talent to perfect their craft. Directors Michael Powell and Brian Desmond Hurst learned on quota films, as did David Lean (as editor), cinematographers Oswald Morris and Guy Green, art director Michael Relph and producer Anthony Havelock-Allan. Even Alexander Korda began his British career working in quota production.

Meanwhile, in more ambitious productions, relatively established directors cemented their reputations with critical and box office successes. Alfred Hitchcock, after a period in the doldrums in the early 1930s at British International Pictures, returned to Gaumont-British and hit form with a series of top-class thrillers, including The 39 Steps (1935), which established Robert Donat as a first rank international star, Sabotage (1936) and The Lady Vanishes (1938).

Herbert Wilcox found popular success fashioning vehicles for his rising star (and later wife), Anna Neagle, particularly with the costume dramas Victoria the Great (1937) and Sixty Glorious Years (1938). Anthony Asquith began the decade with the impressive anti-war film Tell England (1931) and ended it with two superlative stage adaptations, Pygmalion (1938) and French Without Tears (1939). Victor Saville also moved effortlessly between genres, being responsible for the most successful of the Jessie Matthews musical vehicles and the sublime musical comedy Love on Wheels (1932), as well as war drama I Was a Spy (1933) and social drama South Riding (1938).

Whether low or big budget, the decade's most prolific (with approximately a third of the features produced) and successful genre was comedy. The partnering of music-hall veteran Will Hay with Moore Marriott and Graham Moffatt produced one of the greatest comedy teams ever to work in cinema, and while the fast patter and risqué badinage of London-born comedian Max Miller could never migrate entirely successfully to film (despite several attempts), the Lancashire-born comedy performers George Formby and Gracie Fields took to the medium with alacrity, becoming, in the process, the biggest British box office attractions of the decade.

Hailed as the king and queen of comedy, Formby and Fields were also musical royalty, even if it was Jessie Matthews who reigned supreme over the genre. Variety films, beginning with Elstree Calling (d. Adrian Brunel, 1930), squeezed in as many musical performers as possible and were produced throughout the decade, while musical vehicles for the disparate likes of operatic tenors ( Jan Kiepura, Richard Tauber) and dance band leaders ( Henry Hall, Jack Payne) also met popular acclaim. Comedy was at the heart of the majority of musicals, although Herbert Wilcox's adaptation of Noël Coward's Bitter Sweet (1933), starring Anna Neagle, the Evelyn Laye vehicle Evensong (d. Victor Saville, 1934), and a version of Leoncavallo's opera Pagliacci (d. Karl Grune, 1936) with Richard Tauber were rare examples of musicals with dramatic themes.

Crime films constituted at least a fifth of all features produced in the 1930s. The many popular adaptations throughout the decade of Edgar Wallace's blood and thunder yarns (he even directed two films himself, albeit one in 1929) helped to make him the most adapted author of the decade. Other examples from the genre include whodunits solved by Agatha Christie's detective creation Hercule Poirot (played by Austin Trevor in three films), the thick-ear adventures of Bulldog Drummond ( Ralph Richardson and John Lodge in two films), tales of low life criminality in the works of author James Curtis (whose novel They Drive by Night became one of the finest British films of the period (d. Arthur Woods, 1939)), and spy dramas, which proliferated towards the end of the decade, including the lively Q Planes (d. Tim Whelan, 1939).

But profits from the home market could be small, so overseas success was much sought after. The biggest market, of course, was the United States, and the phenomenal success there of Alexander Korda's partly American-financed The Private Life of Henry VIII (1933), not only established Korda as a major force within the British industry, but led to the wider misguided conviction that American doors were now permanently open to British product.

Korda subsequently pitched his studio's films simultaneously at American and domestic markets, with big budget productions such as the ambitious science fiction spectacle Things to Come (d. William Cameron Menzies, 1936); spy drama Knight Without Armour (d. Jacques Feyder, 1937), teaming Robert Donat with Hollywood import Marlene Dietrich; and his series of patriotic films of Empire, including Sanders of the River (d. Zoltan Korda, 1935) and The Four Feathers (d. Zoltan Korda, 1939).

But Korda was not alone in his ambitions. Michael Balcon, head of production at both Gaumont-British and Gainsborough Studios, had an internationalist outlook during this period (rather more than in his later Ealing years) and eagerly targeted the American market with big budget productions, many showcasing American stars. Among these was Balcon's own Empire film, Rhodes of Africa (d. Berthold Viertel, 1936), starring Walter Huston. Others examples included the Canadian-set western The Great Barrier (d. Milton Rosmer, 1937), featuring Richard Arlen, and, reputedly the company's most expensive film, science fiction drama The Tunnel (d. Maurice Elvey, 1935), with Richard Dix.

One of the main contemporary criticisms levelled against the commercial British cinema, principally by a burgeoning intelligentsia (the critical journal Close Up had been launched in 1927), but also by some of the more mainstream critics, is that the films, whether big or low budget, failed to reflect social reality, depict ordinary British life or venture beyond the confines of a studio. A number of John Baxter's productions may have focused on working-class communities (albeit in studio recreations), and location work was a notable feature of some films with working-class themes, from the Lancashire cotton mills in Sing as We Go! (d. Basil Dean, 1934) and Cotton Queen (d. Bernard Vorhaus, 1937) to the fishing fleets of Grimsby in The Last Adventurers (d. Roy Kellino, 1937). But such productions were, admittedly, in the minority.

The depiction of the lives of ordinary British people was generally left to the documentary movement, whose films, emerging from such bodies as the Empire Marketing Board Film Unit, the GPO Film Unit (both overseen by the movement's figurehead, John Grierson) and the Realist Film Unit, are today widely hailed as the peak achievement of 1930s British cinema. Certainly, documentary blossomed in the 1930s, and the reputation of films like Night Mail (d. Harry Watt/Basil Wright, 1936) and Housing Problems (d. Arthur Elton/E.H. Anstey, 1935) survives to this day.

The 1940s were to witness a convergence, in terms of personnel, style and content, between the commercial and documentary sectors of the industry. The contribution of the latter, however, has generally been praised at the expense of the former. Yet despite the accusations of mediocrity levelled at the feature industry, there had been a clear improvement in the quality of British cinema during the 1930s, technically, artistically and commercially. While producers during the war years enjoyed an abeyance of Hollywood imports, the industry in the 1930s faced full-blooded competition while still adjusting to sound and, later, absorbing the emergence of Technicolor. Without such expertise, the triumphant achievements of British cinema in its 'golden age' would have been all the more difficult, perhaps impossible.

John Oliver

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BFI Screenonline: British Film in the 1930s

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whereas the 1940s has long been hailed as a 'golden age' for British cinema, the preceding decade has been viewed largely with disdain; the likes of Alfred Hitchcock and Alexander Korda have been seen to offer sporadic oases of cinematic quality in a desert of mediocrity.

# data[].attributes.headline
Comment la littérature gothique est elle-adaptée au cinéma.

# data[].attributes.subject
Comment la littérature gothique est elle-adaptée au cinéma.

# data[].attributes.headline
En quoi Hollywood est un outil de soft power et de narration de l'identite americaine?

# data[].attributes.subject
En quoi Hollywood est un outil de soft power et de narration de l'identite americaine?

# data[].attributes.body
west side story

# data[].attributes.headline
Dans quelle mesure les comedies musicales sont parfois un meilleur moyen narratif que des simples recits ou dialogues?

# data[].attributes.subject
Dans quelle mesure les comedies musicales sont parfois un meilleur moyen narratif que des simples recits ou dialogues?

# data[].attributes.headline
how is character development shown through different shows and movies,  

# data[].attributes.subject
how is character development shown through different shows and movies,  

# data[].attributes.body
Comment est representé le Gotique dans la littérature à travers le cinema des années 1930 au Royaume-Uni

# data[].attributes.body
Comment est representé le Gotique dans la littérature et le cinema des années 1930 au Royaume-Uni.

# data[].attributes.headline
Comment les personnalités publiques adaptent-elles leurs discours en fonction de leur public ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Comment les personnalités publiques adaptent-elles leurs discours en fonction de leur public ?

# data[].attributes.body
L'art peut-il transformer une société ? (art et territoires)

# data[].attributes.headline
Apprendre des langues, une condition de paix?

# data[].attributes.subject
Apprendre des langues, une condition de paix?

# data[].attributes.body
The thin line between cultural appropriation and cultural appreciation (territories and identity)

# data[].attributes.headline
 Peut on prévoir  des nouvelles formes de faire la guerre?

# data[].attributes.subject
 Peut on prévoir  des nouvelles formes de faire la guerre?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990; second edition 1999) is a book by the philosopher Judith Butler in which the author argues that gender is performative, meaning that it is maintained, created or perpetuated by iterative repetitions when speaking and interacting with each other.

Butler criticizes one of the central assumptions of feminist theory, that there exists an identity and a subject that requires representation in politics and language. For Butler, "women" and " woman" are categories complicated by factors such as class, ethnicity, and sexuality. Moreover, the universality presumed by these terms parallels the assumed universality of the patriarchy and erases the particularity of oppression in distinct times and places. Butler thus eschews identity politics in favor of a new, coalitional feminism that critiques the basis of identity and gender. They challenge assumptions about the distinction often made between sex and gender, according to which sex is biological while gender is culturally constructed. Butler argues that this false distinction introduces a split into the supposedly unified subject of feminism. Sexed bodies cannot signify without gender, and the apparent existence of sex prior to discourse and cultural imposition is only an effect of the functioning of gender. Sex and gender are both constructed.

Examining the work of the philosophers Simone de Beauvoir and Luce Irigaray, Butler explores the relationship between power and categories of sex and gender. For de Beauvoir, women constitute a lack against which men establish their identity; for Irigaray, this dialectic belongs to a "signifying economy" that excludes the representation of women altogether because it employs phallocentric language. Both assume that there exists a female "self-identical being" in need of representation, and their arguments hide the impossibility of "being" a gender at all. Butler argues instead that gender is performative: no identity exists behind the acts that supposedly "express" gender, and these acts constitute, rather than express, the illusion of the stable gender identity. If the appearance of "being" a gender is thus an effect of culturally influenced acts, then there exists no solid, universal gender: constituted through the practice of performance, the gender "woman" (like the gender "man") remains contingent and open to interpretation and "resignification". In this way, Butler provides an opening for subversive action. They call for people to trouble the categories of gender through performance.

Discussing the patriarchy, Butler notes that feminists have frequently made recourse to the supposed pre-patriarchal state of culture as a model upon which to base a new, non-oppressive society. For this reason, accounts of the original transformation of sex into gender by means of the incest taboo have proven particularly useful to feminists. Butler revisits three of the most popular: the anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss's anthropological structuralism, in which the incest taboo necessitates a kinship structure governed by the exchange of women; Joan Riviere's psychoanalytic description of "womanliness as a masquerade" that hides masculine identification and therefore also conceals a desire for another woman; and Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytic explanation of mourning and melancholia, in which loss prompts the ego to incorporate attributes of the lost loved one, in which cathexis becomes identification.

Butler extends these accounts of gender identification in order to emphasize the productive or performative aspects of gender. With Lévi-Strauss, they suggest that incest is "a pervasive cultural fantasy" and that the presence of the taboo generates these desires; with Riviere, they state that mimicry and masquerade form the "essence" of gender; with Freud, they assert that "gender identification is a kind of melancholia in which the sex of the prohibited object is internalized as a prohibition" (63) and therefore that "same-sexed gender identification" depends on an unresolved (but simultaneously forgotten) homosexual cathexis (with the father, not the mother, of the Oedipal myth). For Butler, "heterosexual melancholy is culturally instituted as the price of stable gender identities" (70) and for heterosexuality to remain stable, it demands the notion of homosexuality, which remains prohibited but necessarily within the bounds of culture. Finally, they point again to the productivity of the incest taboo, a law which generates and regulates approved heterosexuality and subversive homosexuality, neither of which exists before the law.

In response to the work of the psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan that posited a paternal Symbolic order and a repression of the "feminine" required for language and culture, Julia Kristeva added women back into the narrative by claiming that poetic language-the " semiotic"-was a surfacing of the maternal body in writing, uncontrolled by the paternal logos. For Kristeva, poetic writing and maternity are the sole culturally permissible ways for women to return to the maternal body that bore them, and female homosexuality is an impossibility, a near psychosis. Butler criticizes Kristeva, claiming that her insistence on a "maternal" that precedes culture and on poetry as a return to the maternal body is essentialist: "Kristeva conceptualizes this maternal instinct as having an ontological status prior to the paternal law, but she fails to consider the way in which that very law might well be the cause of the very desire it is said to repress" (90). Butler argues the notion of "maternity" as the long-lost haven for females is a social construction, and invokes Michel Foucault's arguments in The History of Sexuality (1976) to posit that the notion that maternity precedes or defines women is itself a product of discourse.

Butler dismantles part of Foucault's critical introduction to the journals he published of Herculine Barbin, an intersex person who lived in France during the 19th century and eventually committed suicide when she was forced to live as a man by the authorities. In his introduction to the journals, Foucault writes of Barbin's early days, when she was able to live her gender or "sex" as she saw fit as a "happy limbo of nonidentity" (94). Butler accuses Foucault of romanticism, claiming that his proclamation of a blissful identity "prior" to cultural inscription contradicts his work in The History of Sexuality, in which he posits that the idea of a "real" or "true" or "originary" sexual identity is an illusion, in other words that "sex" is not the solution to the repressive system of power but part of that system itself. Butler instead places Barbin's early days not in a "happy limbo" but along a larger trajectory, always part of a larger network of social control. They suggest finally that Foucault's surprising deviation from his ideas on repression in the introduction might be a sort of "confessional moment", or vindication of Foucault's own homosexuality of which he rarely spoke and on which he permitted himself only once to be interviewed.

Butler traces the feminist theorist Monique Wittig's thinking about lesbianism as the one recourse to the constructed notion of sex. The notion of "sex" is always coded as female, according to Wittig, a way to designate the non-male through an absence. Women, thus reduced to "sex", cannot escape carrying sex as a burden. Wittig argues that even naming body parts as sexual creates a fictitious limitation of what body parts can be considered erogenous, socially constructing the features themselves and fragmenting what was really once "whole". Language, repeated over time, "produces reality-effects that are eventually misperceived as 'facts'" (115).

Butler questions the notion that "the body" itself is a natural entity that "admits no genealogy", a usual given without explanation: "How are the contours of the body clearly marked as the taken-for-granted ground or surface upon which gender signification are inscribed, a mere facticity devoid of value, prior to significance?" (129). Building on the thinking of the anthropologist Mary Douglas, outlined in her Purity and Danger (1966), Butler claims that the boundaries of the body have been drawn to instate certain taboos about limits and possibilities of exchange. Thus the hegemonic and homophobic press has read the pollution of the body that AIDS brings about as corresponding to the pollution of the homosexual's sexual activity, in particular his crossing the forbidden bodily boundary of the perineum. In other words, Butler's claim is that "the body is itself a consequence of taboos that render that body discrete by virtue of its stable boundaries" (133). Butler proposes the practice of drag as a way to destabilize the exteriority/interiority binary, finally to poke fun at the notion that there is an "original" gender, and to demonstrate playfully to the audience, through an exaggeration, that all gender is in fact scripted, rehearsed, and performed.

Butler attempts to construct a feminism (via the politics of jurido- discursive power) from which the gendered pronoun has been removed or not presumed to be a reasonable category. They claim that even the binary of subject/object, which forms the basic assumption for feminist practices-"we, 'women,' must become subjects and not objects"-is a hegemonic and artificial division. The notion of a subject is for them formed through repetition, through a "practice of signification" (144). Butler offers parody (for example, the practice of drag) as a way to destabilize and make apparent the invisible assumptions about gender identity and the inhabitability of such "ontological locales" (146) as gender. By redeploying those practices of identity and exposing as always failed the attempts to "become" one's gender, they believe that a positive, transformative politics can emerge.

All page numbers are from the first edition: Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York, Routledge, 1990).

Gender Trouble was first published by Routledge in 1990. Later that decade, a second edition was published by Routledge. In 2006, a Routledge Classics edition was published.

Gender Trouble was reviewed by Shane Phelan in Women & Politics. The work has enjoyed widespread popularity outside of traditional academic circles, even inspiring a fanzine, Judy! Butler, in a preface to the second edition of the book, writes that they were surprised by the size of the book's audience and its eventual status as a founding text of queer theory. Anthony Elliott writes that with the publication of Gender Trouble, Butler established themself at the forefront of feminism, women's studies, lesbian and gay studies, and queer theory. According to Elliott, the core idea expounded in Gender Trouble, that "gender is a kind of improvised performance, a form of theatricality that constitutes a sense of identity", came to be seen as "foundational to the project of queer theory and the advancing of dissident sexual practices during the 1990s."

On November 23, 2018, the playwright Jordan Tannahill read the entirety of Gender Trouble outside the Hungarian Parliament Building in protest of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's decision to revoke accreditation and funding for gender studies programs in the country.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990; second edition 1999) is a book by the philosopher Judith Butler in which the author argues that gender is performative, meaning that it is maintained, created or perpetuated by iterative repetitions when speaking and interacting with each other.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Keep it Complex and Migrants in Culture will host an Activation Day for migrants, people of colour and allies working in the cultural sector, on Saturday 18 January at Raven Row (London). The day aims to focus collective imagination, intelligence and energies on building a cultural sector that is open and accountable to migrants, people of colour and others impacted by unjust immigration policies. Migrants in Culture and Keep it Complex want to connect and build a movement able to resist the government's Hostile Environment Policy, and to work towards a cultural sector for us all to thrive.

The activation day will feature contributions from United Voices of the World, Migrants Organise, Unis Resist Border Controls, Asia-Art-Activism, Counterpoints Arts, performingborders, Foreign Actions Production, and Shubbak Roundtable, along with workshops and interventions by artist and author Season Butler and NEON's movement builders.

LADA is delighted to support this vital initiative through providing a bibliotheque of books, pamphlets and publications on questions of migration and migrants, culture, activism and organising, which bring together art activism and organising, and issues of social justice at the intersection of race and migration. The bibliotheque will be placed in a dedicated quiet area and remain accessible throughout the activation day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MIGRANTS MAKE CULTURE: Together against the Hostile Environment - LADA Bibliotheque - LADA Live Art Development Agency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Keep it Complex and Migrants in Culture will host an Activation Day for migrants, people of colour and allies working in the cultural sector, on Saturday 18 January at Raven Row (London). The day aims to focus collective imagination, intelligence and energies on building a cultural sector that is open and accountable to migrants, people of colour and others impacted by unjust immigration policies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
She said she was "genuinely sorry" about the anxiety caused by the Home Office threatening the children of Commonwealth citizens with deportation.

The UK government "valued" the contribution they had made, she said, and they had a right to stay in the UK.

It comes amid reports some are still facing deportation.

The deportation of one man, which had been due to take place on Wednesday, has been halted following an intervention by Labour MP David Lammy.

The Tottenham MP said the mother of 35-year-old Mozi Haynes got in touch saying her son was due to be removed from the country after two failed applications to stay.

Mr Lammy later tweeted that he had been contacted by Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes, who had said that Mr Haynes would not now be deported on Wednesday and his case was "being reviewed".

The Tottenham MP, who has called the controversy a "national disgrace," urged the children of the Windrush generation facing deportation to contact him, promising "justice will be done".

Mr Lammy said that of 12,056 deportations in 2015, 901 were over 50 years of age. and 303 were to Jamaica. He is calling on the Home Office to review all such cases since 2014 to "ensure no wrongful detentions have taken place".

The Home Office said it was making efforts to speak to Mr Haynes to advise him that there is no requirement for him to leave the UK. Officials say it is not a Windrush case and was never an "enforced removal".

The department said it was looking at 49 cases relating to Windrush migrants as a result of calls received on Tuesday.

Landing cards

A former Home Office employee has, meanwhile, told The Guardian that thousands of landing card slips recording Windrush immigrants' arrival dates in the UK were destroyed in 2010 during an office move.

The former worker, who is not named by the newspaper, said managers were warned by staff that destroying the cards would make it harder to check the records of older Caribbean-born residents experiencing difficulties proving their right to remain in the UK.

The government said the decision to "dispose of" the cards had been an "operational" one, taken by officials at the UK Border Agency, rather than the then Home Secretary Theresa May.

A Home Office spokesman said: "Registration slips provided details of an individual's date of entry, they did not provide any reliable evidence relating to ongoing residence in the UK or their immigration status.

"So it would be misleading and inaccurate to suggest that registration slips would therefore have a bearing on immigration cases whereby Commonwealth citizens are proving residency in the UK."

The prime minister's spokesman said things like school records, exam certificates, employment records and bills were seen by the Home Office as "more reliable evidence of ongoing residence".

In her apology to Caribbean leaders, Theresa May said she wanted to "dispel any impression that my government is in some sense clamping down on Commonwealth citizens, particularly those from the Caribbean who have built a life here".

She said the current controversy had arisen because of new rules, introduced by her as home secretary, designed to make sure only those with the right to remain in the UK could access the welfare system and the NHS.

"This has resulted in some people, through no fault of their own, now needing to be able to evidence their immigration status," she told the foreign ministers and leaders of 12 Caribbean nations in Downing Street.

"And the overwhelming majority of the Windrush generation do have the documents that they need, but we are working hard to help those who do not."

The PM added: "Those who arrived from the Caribbean before 1973 and lived here permanently without significant periods of time away in the last 30 years have the right to remain in the UK.

"As do the vast majority of long-term residents who arrived later, and I don't want anybody to be in any doubt about their right to remain here in the United Kingdom."

A new taskforce and helpline has been established for those people who arrived from the Commonwealth decades ago as children but were now being incorrectly identified as illegal immigrants.

Mrs May said people involved in the process of establishing their status should not be "left out of pocket" as a result and would not have to pay for documentation.

Cases have emerged - such as these in the Guardian - of people who have lost their jobs, rights to health and benefits and faced deportation despite being able to show they have paid tax and National Insurance for decades.

Jamaica's Prime Minister Andrew Holness said he had accepted Theresa May's apology, adding: "I believe that the right thing is being done at this time."

He said he did not know how many people had been affected by the controversy, but it was "at least" in the hundreds.

Asked if Mrs May was to blame for the situation, he said: "I can't answer that question. The truth is that she has said there has been a policy change, that this was an unintended consequence.

"As Caribbean leaders we have to accept that in good faith."

He added that Mrs May had not been able to say "definitively" that nobody had been deported as a result of issues with paperwork.

Timothy Harris, prime minister of St Kitts and Nevis, said: "We see this basically as the start of the dialogue, as evidence is uncovered which requires correction."

He said he hoped the British government would "make good any injustice" suffered by individuals, including by offering compensation.

Gaston Browne, the prime minister of Antigua and Barbuda, also backed compensation for those affected and told BBC News there should be "reprisals for those who dropped the ball" in the UK government.

Thousands of people arrived in the UK as children in the first wave of Commonwealth immigration 70 years ago, often on their parents' passports.

They are known as the Windrush generation - a reference to the ship, the Empire Windrush, that brought workers from the West Indies to Britain in 1948.

Under the 1971 Immigration Act, all Commonwealth citizens already living in the UK were given indefinite leave to remain.

However, the Home Office did not keep a record of those granted leave to remain or issue any paperwork confirming it, meaning it is difficult for the individuals to now prove they are in the UK legally.

Changes to immigration law in 2012, which require people to have documentation to work, rent a property or access benefits, including healthcare, have highlighted the issue and left people fearful about their status.

Are you a member or descendant of the Windrush Generation - or did you arrive in the UK from another Commonwealth country as a minor between 1948-1971? We'd like to hear from you via email haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also contact us in the following ways:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Windrush generation: Theresa May apologises to Caribbean leaders

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
She said she was "genuinely sorry" about the anxiety caused by the Home Office threatening the children of Commonwealth citizens with deportation. The UK government "valued" the contribution they had made, she said, and they had a right to stay in the UK. It comes amid reports some are still facing deportation.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Hostile Environment immigration Policy

# data[].attributes.subject
The Hostile Environment immigration Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Discrimination, exploitation, and lonely deaths

Elvis (not his real name), a Filipino man, died at home of suspected coronavirus, too afraid to seek medical help in case he got deported.

Michael lost his job as a special needs teacher and was threatened with deportation after he was accused of having no right to be in the UK, despite having lived in the UK for more than 50 years.

Anjay was exploited by one employer after another, with wages stolen, over crowded accommodation or sleeping rough and barely enough food to survive on.

These stories and millions more are the result of one set of policies - the Hostile Environment.

The Hostile Environment explained

Some use the term "Hostile Environment" to describe all policies which make life difficult for migrants living in the UK - treating them as less deserving of dignity and humanity than British citizens.

More specifically, it is a set of policies introduced in 2012 by then-Home Secretary Theresa May, with the aim of making life unbearably difficult in the UK for those who cannot show the right paperwork. Or, as she said at the time; "The aim is to create, here in Britain, a really hostile environment for illegal immigrants."

To achieve this, the Government set about trying to cut undocumented migrants off from using fundamental services including the NHS and state support, and made it illegal to work, or for a landlord to rent them a property. Doctors, landlords, police officers and teachers are tasked with checking immigration status, and often people who look or sound 'foreign' are asked to show their papers in order to rent a home or get medical treatment.

The Home Office also accesses the data that public sector organisations use - so whether you are a patient speaking to a GP, a victim reporting a crime or an exploited worker reporting your boss to the authorities, your data can be checked by immigration officials.

It turns us against each other - turning professionals whose duty it is to care into immigration enforcers. And it undermines trust in vital public services. When some of us are afraid to go to the doctor or to ask the police for help, we are all made more vulnerable.

Yet the Home Office itself has admitted that the "vast majority" of undocumented people have done, and will do, nothing wrong.
Join our campaign for a fairer immigration system

What impact does the Hostile Environment have?

The Hostile Environment deters people from going to the doctor for fear of racking up a huge bill or being reported, detained and deported. It deters undocumented migrants from reporting crime to the police. It deters undocumented migrants from reporting unsafe working conditions or exploitative employers. It reduces the options for renting a home and pushes people into poor quality or even dangerous accommodation, at the mercy of their landlord.

Hostile Environment policies also make doctors, landlords, teachers and other public sector workers responsible for immigration checks. These policies encourage and incentivise us to be suspicious of each other and undermine trust in our public services.

There is no evidence that the Hostile Environment achieves its stated aim of forcing people out of the UK. But there is an extraordinary amount of evidence of the damage being done.

Case study: the Right to Rent scheme

The Right to Rent scheme requires landlords to check the immigration paperwork of potential tenants. If they rent a property to someone without the right paperwork, they face huge fines or even imprisonment. But there is effectively no consequence for taking the 'low-risk' option, opting for white people with British passports.

The result is that the Court of Appeal has found it could take black, Asian and ethnic minority people and migrants up to twice as long to find a property to rent as a white British person.

The Government should be doing everything in its power to end discrimination and racism. Instead, it says the discrimination caused is 'worth it' for the sake of the Hostile Environment. We're fighting this at the European Court of Human Rights - find out more and support the case.

Who is impacted by the Hostile Environment?

We are all impacted by the Hostile Environment, which increases racial discrimination and asks us to be suspicious of each other. At JCWI, we believe Britain can do better than this.

Those most affected are people without status in the UK. Most of the undocumented population in the UK is made up of people who came here legally, but subsequently lost their status, very often through no fault of their own. Some make the difficult decision to leave an abusive partner or an exploitative employer, even though it means they will lose their immigration status. Others grow up assuming they're British, only to be told that they aren't, even though they've never known any other country. And some fall out of regular status because they can't afford the skyrocketing fees to renew their visa or to challenge an incorrect decision made by the Home Office.

No matter our nationality or immigration status, we all deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.
Take action: Join us to fight for fairer immigration rules
How did the Hostile Environment cause the Windrush scandal?

The Windrush generation are people who arrived in the UK from Caribbean countries between 1948 and 1973. They were British subjects and many children arrived here on their parents' passports. Fast forward to 2012, when the Hostile Environment was introduced, and many of the Windrush generation, now in their 60s or 70s, lacked the documentation to prove their right to remain in the UK. This was made worse by the fact that the Home Office had destroyed thousands of landing cards and other records - in spite of warnings of the problems this could cause.

The Home Office told the Windrush generation they must prove they had lived in the UK since before 1973. The Home Office demanded at least one official document from every year they had lived here. Attempting to find documents from decades ago created a huge, and in many cases, impossible burden on people who had done nothing wrong.

In 2017 it started to emerge that hundreds of members of the Windrush generation had been wrongly detained, deported and denied legal rights. Coverage of these individuals' stories began to break in several newspapers, and Caribbean leaders took the issue up with then-prime minister, Theresa May.

The Home Office has argued the Windrush scandal was an accident - but an independent report in March 2020, the "Windrush Lessons Learned Review", makes it clear - this was the inevitable result of policies designed to make life impossible for those without the right papers. The Home Office has promised to learn the lessons of the scandal, but the only way to stop it happening again, is to scrap the Hostile Environment.

What are the alternatives to the Hostile Environment?

The Government itself accepts that the vast majority of undocumented people have done and will do no harm in the UK. Instead of punishing people for becoming undocumented, the Government should enable and support people to get secure status. Currently, routes to status for those who are undocumented can take decades and cost tens of thousands of pounds. At JCWI we are calling on the Government to create new affordable and accessible routes to status.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the hostile environment? Who is impacted by the hostile environment? How is the hostile environment connected to the Windrush scandal? All your questions answered.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Une enquête parue dans le Figaro sur "la Cancel Culture", co signée par Laure Mandeville et Eugénie Bastié analyse cette idéologie venue des universités américaines et qui semble et gagner la pensée outre-Atlantique. Etre "woke", c'est l'expression qui revient dans la gauche américaine et qui fait polémique. Laure Mandeville, grand reporter, et correspondante aux Etats-Unis de nombreuses années a enquêté.

"Woke" est un terme qui veut dire "éveillé" et fait allusion à l'idée qu'il faut débusquer en permanence des injustices sociales et qu'il faudrait en permanence assurer une veille sociale pour trouver ces injustices là où elles se trouvent.

Le but de cette enquête était de faire le point d'une idéologie. C'est un phénomène qui a débordé des campus américains et s'est introduit au sein de la société mais aussi de l'autre côté de l'Atlantique. Nous voulions décrire mais aussi alerter sur les dérives de cette idéologie qui nous paraissait extrêmement dangereuse.

Nous voulions montrer aussi qu'il existe un certains nombre de libéraux qui se situent à gauche de l'échiquier politique et qui se rebellent aujourd'hui. Nous voulions montrer comment ils s'opposent, et leur donner la parole pour qu'ils décrivent comment ils voyaient les tenants et aboutissants ainsi que les dangers de cette dérive idéologique.

Pour aller plus loin :

"Cancel culture", "woke": quand la gauche américaine devient folle, Le Figaro

Genre, identités, cancel culture... Le fantasme du péril américain, Le Monde

Les mots de la "cancel culture", Courrier International

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"Cancel culture", "woke" : quand la gauche américaine devient folle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Une enquête parue dans le Figaro sur "la Cancel Culture", co signée par Laure Mandeville et Eugénie Bastié analyse cette idéologie venue des universités américaines et qui semble et gagner la pensée outre-Atlantique. Etre "woke", c'est l'expression qui revient dans la gauche américaine et qui fait polémique.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tablet est le meilleur site intellectuel juif et américain du Net. Et sa fondatrice, Alana Newhouse, vient de mettre en ligne un texte qui mérite le détour, tant il détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain contemporain, étouffé par la culture woke. Pour Newhouse, la vie culturelle et sociale américaines sont en ruines, minées par un phénomène qui voit l'idéologie remplacer la créativité.

Un système en ruines ?

Premier constat : alors qu'Alana Newhouse s'étonnait auprès d'amis médecins des carences du système médical aux Etats-Unis, leur réponse a été : " Il y a encore des gens très bien dans le secteur médical américain, mais en tant que système, il est en morceaux, esquinté, détruit. Les erreurs médicales sont devenues la troisième cause de mortalité dans le pays. On surmédicalise les patients. On multiplie les opérations inutiles. Les hôpitaux sont tombés sous la coupe de leurs administrateurs." Avant de l'interroger à leur tour : "Explique-nous, toi la journaliste, pourquoi le journalisme semble tombé si bas ?" Lorsque, dans un pays, tout le monde constate, dans son domaine, une évidente dégradation du niveau des performances, on est amené à se poser la question : ne serait-ce pas le système tout entier qui serait tombé en ruines, sans qu'on y ait pris garde ?

Ceci n'est pas valable que pour les Etats-Unis. Pour avoir une chance de redresser la barre, il va nous falloir avoir le courage de regarder ses manques en face. C'est ce à quoi Alana Newhouse invite ses lecteurs américains.

Un tissu d'institutions culturelles ubérisé

La vie intellectuelle et culturelle, aux Etats-Unis, était assise sur un vaste ensemble d'institutions telles que les universités, les journaux et magazines, les maisons d'édition, Hollywood. Chacune jouait sa partition, à la manière d'un big band de jazz. Il y avait à la fois de la variété et un résultat "clair et lisible". Au niveau local, des milliers d'institutions locales de socialisation secondaire structuraient la vie des gens et leur donnaient un horizon de sens partagé. Mais ces quotidiens locaux, ces magasins de centre-ville et ces clubs et associations sont à présent fermés. Parallèlement, le syndicalisme a pratiquement disparu dans le secteur privé ; à mesure que le salariat lui-même tendait à être remplacé par l'ubérisation. Ce que les Américains appellent la "gig economy".

La montée en puissance d'une idéologie culturelle unique

En outre, je cite - " à une vitesse croissante, au cours des trois dernières années, une cohorte inspirée par une idéologie unique s'est emparée de la totalité des infrastructures de la vie culturelle et intellectuelle américaine." Les institutions ont été emportées, une à une, par " une bande réduite d'élitistes ricanant, qui se sont arrogés le droit de juger et de contrôler la vie de ceux qu'ils perçoivent comme inférieurs ". Et cela se voit jusque dans l'esthétique dominante.

Jusqu'à une période récente, l'esthétique régnante aux Etats-Unis, c'était le modernisme. Une esthétique de l'âge industriel, de l'âge de la machine, de la croyance au progrès et en l'efficacité.

La révolution actuellement en marche est celle de l'âge du numérique. Elle valorise l'absence de limites et de frontières ; la vitesse ; l'accessibilité ; elle est allergique aux hiérarchies, mais délégitime toute voix discordante ; elle a remplacé la démocratie par les choix effectués par une majorité de consommateurs et de participants aux réseaux à un moment donné sur une plateforme donnée - sachant que cela peut changer d'un moment à l'autre. C'est l'esthétique de la Silicon Valley.

La "flatness", esthétique de la Silicon Valley

Alana Newhouse la définit d'un mot : flatness : pas d'aspérité, ni de frottement, monocorde et fade. C'est celle qui correspond à l'idée que se font du monde les nouveaux rois de l'époque, assis sur les milliards de dollars de l'économie numérique. C'est eux qui donnent le ton.

Leur esthétique flat, ils l'ont développée en une idéologie : celle qui fut longtemps enseignée aux employés de Facebook : "Move fast and break shit ! [Allez vite et faites péter des trucs]. C'est ce qu'ils appellent "social justice". Concrètement, elle procède d'un " transfert de pouvoir et d'argent d'une ampleur historique à une élite minuscule", qui vit, se marie et se reproduit entre soi. Mais qui respire le contentement de soi.

Ils ont en commun le discours codé de l'intersectionnalité, appris dans les universités d'élite. Et à travers leur contrôle de l'Université, de l'internet et des principaux médias, ils ont imposé un conformisme pesant à la vie intellectuelle et culturelle américaine.

Les jeunes qui veulent faire carrière savent quelles sont exactement les lignes rouges à ne pas franchir. Ils deviennent, à leur tour, les missionnaires de la nouvelle doxa politico-culturelle. Dans une atmosphère de cynique hypocrisie. Elle inspire leur nihilisme.

Du politically correct à la culture woke

A travers notre propre usage des plateformes, nous subissons tous ce conformisme sous surveillance, cette "allergie à l'excellence", au nom de l'idéologie.

Mais, poursuit Alana Newhouse, tous les sondages montrent que la grande majorité des Américains ne sont pas des idéologues. Chaque fois que la clique woke essaie d'interdire, d'annuler quelque chose, le public vote avec ses pieds dans le sens inverse.

Ainsi, lorsque HBO a décidé de retirer, pour "racisme", Autant en emporte le vent de sa liste des films disponibles en ligne, les gens se sont rués sur Amazon pour y acheter le DVD. Il devenu sa meilleure vente.

Pendant ce temps, un nombre incroyable de films et de livres bien-pensants et politiquement-corrects, sponsorisés par les nouveaux magnats, font des bides retentissants. Ces compagnies préfèrent apparemment perdre de l'argent que de risquer se faire attaquer sur Twitter par les surveillants woke.

Un décalage à investir ?

Il y une déconnection croissante entre les décideurs culturels mandatés et les attentes du public. Cela crée de formidables opportunités pour des créateurs décidés à prendre des risques, à "explorer les hérésies", afin de redevenir novateurs. Mais, pour le moment, la culture américaine qui fut si brillante, paraît éteinte et morne.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La culture woke, matrice d'un conformisme étouffant et délétère ?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Alana Newhouse vient de publier un texte qui détonne dans le paysage médiatique américain, paralysé par la vague dite "woke". Pour la fondatrice du magazine Tablet, la vie culturelle et sociale de son pays est en ruines. Une idéologie monochrome et normative bride désormais toute créativ[...]

# data[].attributes.body
Check out this concept that applies to the way one culture can be studies and approached

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Home page Site search Site index

Iceberg analogy of culture

Culture is much more deeply-rooted and interconnected with our sense of identity and self- understanding than people imagine. Thinking about what we can see and understand of a culture not our own is somewhat similar to the way we perceive an iceberg. Indeed, the same thing may be true even of what we understand to be our own culture. We may not even be aware how our specific culture dominates our value system and shapes our view of life, our interpersonal relationshps and so on.

Think of the iceberg. Though logic tells us we are only seeing a very small portion of an icerberg above water, it's still hard to imagine that we are seeing such a small part of it. Indeed, almost 92% of an iceberg lies below the surfance of the water. The first known use of an iceberg as an analogy to explain the concept of culture was by Edward T. Hall in 1976.

Other analogies or metaphors for culture have included an onion, a pot of flower plants and even a fish swimming in water
Iceberg image modified from Gary R. Weaver, "Understanding and Coping with Cross-cultural Adjustment Stress" in Gary R. Weaver, editor, Culture, Communication and Conflict: Readings in Intercultural Relations, second edition (Simon & Schuster Publishing)
&nbsp -- Howard Culbertson

Cultural adjustment realities Cultual bingo icebreaker Bwanda Fusa game Cultural anthropology case studies Christianity and culture Path to cross-cultural understanding Culture shock Ethnocentrism Communication Contextualization Enculturation/Acculturation Ethics of change Mission Points of view Responsibility Values Kwast's culture model Light bulb illustration: What do you see? Missions and culture Monoculturalism My own culture shock PowerPoint presentations on cultural issues> Reentry: Coming home

World missions course materials and syllabi

Howard Culbertson, 5901 NW 81st, Oklahoma City, OK 73132 | Phone: 405-740-4149

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. When you use this material, an acknowledgment of the source would be appreciated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How can an iceberg help us understand culture?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Home page Site search Site index Culture is much more deeply-rooted and interconnected with our sense of identity and self- understanding than people imagine. Thinking about what we can see and understand of a culture not our own is somewhat similar to the way we perceive an iceberg.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ivy-league schools and the tradition of Debate Clubs

# data[].attributes.subject
Ivy-league schools and the tradition of Debate Clubs

# data[].attributes.body
Most US and UK politician attended Ivy-league schools. One intersting common point for your question, is the presence of Deabte Clubs in all these schhols. They help students to prepare and train their speaking skills eloquence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For the first time in its history, the Harvard College Debating Union recently won the title of No. 1 Club of the Year becoming the top-ranked team in the nation, and breaking Yale's 10-year winning streak.

Aditya Dhar '21 and Paloma O'Connor '21 also won the Team of the Year, bringing the honor to Harvard for the first time since 2014. O'Connor is the first woman from Harvard to win the award.

Under the rules of the American Parliamentary Debate Association, teams and individuals are awarded points in every debate, and clubs whose members had the highest combined scores advance to the national championships. The Harvard Club sent teams to tournaments nearly every weekend of the 2019-2020 academic year, winning six and reaching the finals in five others. The Union's top ranking was announced July 12.

By season's end, Harvard had amassed 515.75 points, more than any other team in the country and nearly 100 points more than Yale, the second-highest ranking club, which won 426 points.

"I'm ridiculously proud of this team. There were a few individuals who pretty much never missed a weekend and got heroic results all over the country, but 27 different people got points, and we followed through on a plan that was years in the making to successfully pull this off for the first time," said Jake Miller, one of the HCDU's coaches. Sophia Caldera, another coach, added, "It's especially meaningful to see the [Club of the Year] win because, unlike individual tournament results, COTY recognizes the work of the entire team."

O'Connor said the most important win for her and Dhar came in the penultimate round of the spring semester.

"It was semifinals of the Tufts tournament, days before all Harvard students were asked to vacate campus. We were debating two absolutely superb debaters from George Washington, who were then the top-ranked team. The round determined who would win the Team of the Year award-we were second by a margin, and all of us were acutely aware this tournament was the last tournament of the semester because of the pandemic," she said. "It was certainly not the position Aditya and I hoped we'd be in - we had planned on having another two months of tournaments to get our last few points! - but it all worked out in the end."

The Harvard College Debating Union is Harvard's only internationally competitive debate team. Members compete in both the American Parliamentary and British Parliamentary styles, allowing them to claim both national and world championship titles. Tryouts are held at the beginning of each academic year. No prior debate experience is required.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For the first time in its history, the Harvard College Debating Union recently won the title of No. 1 Club of the Year becoming the top-ranked team in the nation, and breaking Yale's 10-year winning streak. Aditya Dhar '21 and Paloma O'Connor '21 also won the Team of the Year, bringing the honor to Harvard for the first time since 2014.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald Trump's three-day state visit in early June, confirmed last week, will place unique strains on the so-called "special relationship" between the US and Britain - or so it is claimed. The 45th US president is undoubtedly a divisive figure. Polls suggest three quarters of Britons object to his policies and personal behaviour. Like a boorish house guest, Trump seems to delight in upsetting his hosts.

Yet controversial visits by US presidents are nothing new. Ronald Reagan encountered furious protests in 1982 after a decision - agreed with Margaret Thatcher - to deploy nuclear-armed cruise missiles at British bases. George W Bush faced a similarly hostile reception when he came to stay at Buckingham Palace in 2003, months after invading Iraq.

It was not always this way. When newly elected John F Kennedy flew in with his glamorous young wife, Jackie, in 1961, half a million people lined the route from London airport to catch a glimpse of the Camelot fairytale. In 1977, Jimmy Carter visited George Washington's ancestral home in the north-east. To ecstatic applause, the peanut farmer from Georgia told the people of Newcastle: "I am a Geordie now."

These contrasting high and lows accurately reflect the inherent vagaries of a relationship that has rarely run as smoothly as politicians on both sides of the Atlantic often pretend.

It is a relationship born in conflict: the 1775-83 American war of independence. There were more clashes of arms and interests in the 19th century. During the 1861-65 American civil war, Britain's prime minister, Lord Palmerston, who viewed the US as a future imperial rival, hoped the confederate rebels would break the union.

In the modern era, the relationship has been shaped by two mutually reinforcing trends: the steady expansion of US global power, and the decline and fall of the British empire. This evolution was accelerated decisively by the two world wars, which left Britain exhausted and indebted - and confirmed the American ascendancy. Britain's standing, in 1900, as the world's leading military and economic power was usurped in the space of less than half a century.

The relationship has rarely run as smoothly as politicians on both sides of the Atlantic pretend

The story of the post-1945 "special relationship", a term attributed to Winston Churchill, is really the story of how successive British politicians and diplomats have tried, with mixed success, to guide, cajole and manipulate US leaders from a position of ever-increasing weakness. On the American side, it is a story of hard-headed exploitation of US advantage, rendered more palatable by spurious expressions of undying amity.

The historian Max Hastings recalled last year how he warned Theresa May before she took office: "Please do not join the long line of British leaders who delude themselves that the Americans will do us favours." It was an acknowledgement of a chronically lopsided relationship, propped up by an illusion of equality. But May, he wrote, took no notice.

Window-dressing aside, modern US presidents view Britain as a moderately useful client state, junior military partner and gateway to Europe. Americans love the theme park pageantry, royal weddings and Fortnum & Mason. But British prime ministers view the US as an essential, if overbearing, ally. The problem now is that this improbable balancing act, defying the laws of political gravity, is becoming ever harder to sustain.

There is another difficulty. Like Britain, the US is changing - ethnically, culturally, politically. America has never been more detached from the anglosphere - English-speaking nations sharing historical links with the UK. This developing phenomenon could be termed Atlantic drift. In this respect, Trump, for all his exceptional awfulness, is merely a symptom of a larger British concern.

Winston Churchill & Franklin D Roosevelt

For a proud patriot steeped in imperial lore, Churchill was remarkably self-effacing as he strove to enlist the US in Britain's existential struggle against Nazi Germany. Roosevelt had been re-elected in 1940 on a pledge to keep America out of "Europe's war"; 80% of Americans wanted no part in it. While sympathetic to Britain's lonely plight, FDR was determined to restrict US involvement to supplying arms and aid.

Churchill tried every tactic he knew to draw the US in. He warned Roosevelt that if Britain were forced to capitulate, the Axis powers would target America next. British agents in Manhattan waged a covert black propaganda and disinformation campaign to discredit American isolationists and appeasers. Churchill sold British assets at knockdown prices and offered leases on overseas military bases in exchange for clapped-out naval destroyers - a fateful step in the transfer of strategic power from Britain to the US.

"No lover ever studied every whim of his mistress as I did those of President Roosevelt," Churchill wrote after the war. Swallowing his pride, he even styled himself a "loyal lieutenant". But Churchill had no illusions about American altruism. In the darkest hours of 1940-41, he knew Britain needed the US and must pay Roosevelt's price.

In the event, Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, followed by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, finally forced Roosevelt off the fence - not London's blandishments and threats. Churchill knew then that Britain would survive. America "was up to the neck and in to the death", he said.

As victory neared, Churchill used his influence with Roosevelt to shape the post-war order, binding the US into a new great power system where Britain would remain a pivotal player. The two men co-authored the Atlantic Charter, embodying principles later adopted by the fledgling United Nations. Churchill ensured Britain kept a seat at the top table. He also argued presciently that a strong transatlantic alliance was essential in confronting a new global threat - Stalin's victorious Soviet Union.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

John F Kennedy (rear of car, left) with Harold Macmillan in Florida in 1961. Photograph: Joseph Scherschel/Life Picture Collection/Getty Images

Harold Macmillan & John F Kennedy

Like Churchill and Roosevelt, Macmillan, Conservative prime minister from 1957 to 1963, and Kennedy, who became president in 1961 aged 43, were distantly related. The more experienced Macmillan adopted a paternalistic approach, suggesting that, as the ancient Greeks had guided the Romans, so Britain had a duty to advise and counsel the young Caesar in Washington.

Kennedy had other ideas. Like Dwight D Eisenhower, whom he succeeded, JFK was committed to a partnership with Europe, not least through Nato, and agreed in principle with the Macmillan-ish idea of the interdependence of the "free world". But American unilateralism, and the exercise of what was now unmatched American power, were not to be so easily denied.

As Britain looked on, Kennedy took the world to the brink of nuclear war in the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. In the same year, he abruptly cancelled a joint nuclear weapons programme known as Skybolt. Whitehall was aghast. On Skybolt rested Britain's hopes of remaining a front-rank nuclear power. Under pressure from Macmillan, Kennedy agreed to sell Polaris missiles to Britain instead.

"Jack" and "Mac" got on well personally, with Kennedy boasting to the older man of his sexual conquests and seeking details of the Profumo scandal, according to biographer Christopher Sandford. They succeeded, to a degree, in repairing the huge damage caused by the 1956 Suez crisis, when the US humiliated Macmillan's predecessor, Anthony Eden. But Suez left a lasting mark, signifying Britain's increasing weakness and the hollowness of its unrelinquished imperial pretensions.

Dean Acheson, Harry S Truman's secretary of state, had caused lasting hurt with his mocking comment in 1962 that Britain "has lost an empire and has not yet found a role". His friendship with JFK aside, Macmillan worried about US unreliability. Attempting to hedge Britain's bets - the first of many such balancing efforts - Macmillan sought to join the European Economic Community, forerunner of the EU. It was a fateful moment.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher walk Reagan's dog Lucky on the White House lawn in 1985. Photograph: Bettmann Archive

Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan

The Labour governments led by Harold Wilson and James Callaghan that preceded Thatcher's entry into No 10 in 1979 saw some fraught moments in the US relationship. A Soviet defector's claim that Wilson was a KGB agent was laughed off in Britain, but was reportedly believed by the CIA. Such conspiracy theories fed fears of a US-backed MI5 plot against Wilson and fuelled the anti-Americanism of the British left.

Wilson may have had reason to worry. He angered Lyndon B Johnson, Kennedy's successor, by refusing his request to send troops to Vietnam. Despite its opposition to British colonialism, the US was also critical of Wilson's "east of Suez" military pullback, believing Britain was not pulling its weight. Wilson, a quietly spoken former Oxford don, and Johnson, a foul-mouthed Texan hustler, did not get on. Wilson's 1965 attempt to play Vietnam peacemaker infuriated LBJ, who told him to butt out.

Thatcher's arrival in Downing Street, and the personal rapport she established with Reagan, president from 1981, changed the US-Britain power dynamic, though not the underlying realities. The two instinctively conservative leaders shared a strong dislike of the Soviet Union, which Reagan dubbed the "evil empire", and a passion for free market capitalism.

For these "ideological soul-mates", it was love at first sight. "Your problems will be our problems and when you look for friends we shall be there," Thatcher cooed. In 1985, celebrating the 200th anniversary of diplomatic relations, she declared: "Our relationship ... is special. It just is, and that's that." On one occasion, Thatcher was on the phone from London, berating Reagan over his importunate 1983 invasion of Grenada, when he put his hand over the receiver and said: "Gee, isn't she marvellous!"

Mutual admiration did not prevent deadly serious disputes, not least over Reagan's unhelpful response to Thatcher's pleas following the 1982 Argentinian invasion of the Falkland islands. Luckily for Thatcher and British forces, Caspar Weinberger, Reagan's anglophile defence secretary, secretly authorised crucial assistance. But in a sign Britain could still make its voice heard in the Oval Office, Thatcher's favourable appraisal of the new Russian leader, Mikhail Gorbachev as a man with whom she could "do business" helped to convince the hawkish Reagan that a peaceful end to the cold war was possible. In 1987 Reagan went to Berlin and demanded: "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Two years later, Gorbachev complied.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

George W Bush (left) and Tony Blair at Camp David in 2001. Photograph: Reuters

Tony Blair & George W Bush

The Thatcher-Reagan years marked a high point for the special relationship. The personal chemistry between the two was never quite replicated again. With the end of the cold war, the transatlantic alliance became less vital. China and the Asia-Pacific region were attracting growing US attention. By the mid-1990s, bilateral tensions were on the rise again.

Bill Clinton, who became president in 1993, and John Major, prime minister from 1990 to 1997, were very different people, occupying opposite political poles. In a memorable pre-election faux pas, Major had appeared to endorse Clinton's rival, George HW Bush. They fell out badly over intervention in the Bosnia war. And in 1993, Britain ratified the Maastricht treaty, which created the EU. The treaty increased British involvement in European foreign and security policymaking, separate from the US.

Blair's 1997 victory brought a reset, not least over the Balkans. He and Clinton launched a controversial military adventure in Kosovo in 1999. But it was Blair's sycophantic embrace of Clinton's rightwing successor, George W Bush, after the 2001 terror attacks - and specifically his support for the illegal invasion of Iraq - that exposed fundamental misgivings about the subservient nature of Britain's US ties.

If the Iraq gamble had come off, things might have gone differently. But it was a mostly unmitigated disaster. There were numerous casualties - civilian, military and political. One was Blair's reputation, which never recovered. Another was trust in a now tainted special relationship.

Many Britons felt betrayed by the Bush-Blair collusion, to use a topical term. Many Americans felt Blair should have known better, even if Bush didn't. Iraq also estranged Britain from its main continental allies, France and Germany. Britain was caught between two camps, at odds with both - and this was a sign of worse to come.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Theresa May and Donald Trump at Chequers in July 2018. Photograph: Hannah McKay/Reuters

Theresa May & Donald Trump

Succeeding David Cameron in 2016, May inherited a relationship that had cooled significantly during Barack Obama's presidency. Obama was no anglophile. He held strong views about British colonialism in Kenya, where his father was born, and imperial-era slavery - though he and Michelle enjoyed hobnobbing with the Queen.

Unsentimental and cautious, Obama saw Germany, not Britain, as America's principal European interlocutor. He drew down US forces in Europe, Iraq and Afghanistan, refused to intervene in Syria, and wooed China in a geopolitical "pivot to Asia".

If American disengagement posed a problem for May, it was nothing compared with what was to come. Trump's 2016 election victory opened up a whole new world of pain. On Russia, Nato, the UN, Israel-Palestine, Iran, trade tariffs, climate change, migrants, Muslims and multilateralism, Trump noisily advanced a position directly at odds with established British beliefs and interests.

Trump made plain his disdain for Britain's world role even as he advertised holidays at his Scottish golf resorts. He patronised and insulted May, unctuously holding her hand when she first visited the White House, publicly criti cising her Brexit performance, and claiming without evidence that GCHQ spied on him. His retweeting of anti-Muslim messages from a British far-right group forced May to issue an embarrassing public rebuke.

The Thatcher-Reagan years marked a high point. The personal chemistry between the two was never replicated again

Trump's brief visit last year was notable only for his rudeness to the Queen and how the police kept him out of sight of a disgusted British public. June's high-profile state visit will be different. Security is a real concern. There will be no hiding place for Trump this time. And there will also be no hiding the fact the special relationship that Churchill fought so hard to manufacture is on its last legs.

Britain's 75-year balancing act is close to collapse. Brexit means Europe is no longer a viable strategic alternative to the US alliance, while the US is ceasing to regard Britain as an important European or global player. Trump's words and actions, and the nationalist and unilateralist forces he represents, suggest the shared values and interests that bound Britain and the US together for 75 years are dissolving.

Britain is heading blindly for the void. Perhaps Trump's and May's successors can salvage the wreck. But it will require something very special.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Love, hate ... indifference: is US-UK relationship still special?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald Trump's three-day state visit in early June, confirmed last week, will place unique strains on the so-called "special relationship" between the US and Britain - or so it is claimed. The 45th US president is undoubtedly a divisive figure. Polls suggest three quarters of Britons object to his policies and personal behaviour.

# data[].attributes.body
There is actually a term to define the specific relationship between the USA and the UK. It is called " The special relationship"

# data[].attributes.headline
Obama´s speech in front of the British parliament ( 25 may 2011)

# data[].attributes.subject
Obama´s speech in front of the British parliament ( 25 may 2011)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President Obama Addresses the British Parliament

# data[].attributes.headline
Obama´s 2016 speech at the Canadian Parliament

# data[].attributes.subject
Obama´s 2016 speech at the Canadian Parliament

# data[].attributes.body
Please Aina, note that this speech is a bit political of course, but mainly diplomatic. Obama knows he cannot be re elected ( Trump will win). Another feature of a lot of speech given in English ( a joke to cool down the atmosphere and vin over the audience´s sympathy is always there)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President Barack Obama delivers stirring speech in Parliament

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bienvenue sur le site du trésor de la langue française informatisé. Ce site est une meilleure version du TLFi. Ce site contient environ 50000 définitions de mots de la langue française. Une des particularités de cette base de données est qu'elle référence les premières origines connues des mots dans des ouvrages réputés. Si vous avez des suggestions d'amélioration du site, n'hésitez pas à nous contacter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Le Trésor de la Langue Française informatisé

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bienvenue sur le site du trésor de la langue française informatisé. Ce site est une meilleure version du TLFi. Ce site contient environ 50000 définitions de mots de la langue française. Une des particularités de cette base de données est qu'elle référence les premières origines connues des mots dans des ouvrages réputés.

# data[].attributes.headline
Quels sont le spoints de vue sur la crise de 29 dans le cinema à travers 3 films anglosaxons.

# data[].attributes.subject
Quels sont le spoints de vue sur la crise de 29 dans le cinema à travers 3 films anglosaxons.

# data[].attributes.body
Une divergence dans les points de vue

# data[].attributes.headline
En quoi "Elephant man" de David Lynch a t-il redéfini le rapport de l'homme au monstre ?

# data[].attributes.subject
En quoi "Elephant man" de David Lynch a t-il redéfini le rapport de l'homme au monstre ?

# data[].attributes.headline
Dans quelles mesures la recherche d'une mobilité intergénérationnel à elle influencé les migrants de la "windrush generation"? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Dans quelles mesures la recherche d'une mobilité intergénérationnel à elle influencé les migrants de la "windrush generation"? 

# data[].attributes.headline
En quoi se différencie notre comportement en société et lorsqu'on est tout seul, et comment est il relié à la recherche de soi et à l'évolution personnelle?

# data[].attributes.subject
En quoi se différencie notre comportement en société et lorsqu'on est tout seul, et comment est il relié à la recherche de soi et à l'évolution personnelle?

# data[].attributes.headline
Dans quelle mesure BLM s’inscrit comme une nouvelle forme de militantisme héritée du mouvement afro-américain des droits civiques?

# data[].attributes.subject
Dans quelle mesure BLM s’inscrit comme une nouvelle forme de militantisme héritée du mouvement afro-américain des droits civiques?

# data[].attributes.body
donc expliquer:
⇒  Pourquoi “nouvelle forme de militantisme” (SES)

⇒ pourquoi “héritée du mouvement afro-américain des droits civiques”? (LLCE)

# data[].attributes.headline
En quoi la destruction de statues aux États-Unis soulève-t-elle un problème mémoriel?

# data[].attributes.subject
En quoi la destruction de statues aux États-Unis soulève-t-elle un problème mémoriel?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Vampires: Folklore, fantasy and fact - Michael Molina

# data[].attributes.headline
En quoi sommes-nous attirés par les  les vampires et le gothique? 

# data[].attributes.subject
En quoi sommes-nous attirés par les  les vampires et le gothique? 

# data[].attributes.headline
Quelle est la valeur attachée à la nourriture dans le cinéma américain du 21ème siècle?

# data[].attributes.subject
Quelle est la valeur attachée à la nourriture dans le cinéma américain du 21ème siècle?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
L'origine du mot remonte au verbe latin monere dont le sens religieux était " avertir, annoncer, éclairer ". De ce verbe est dérivé le mot religieux monstrum, " avertissement des dieux ", qui désignait un fait prodigieux (parce que si c'était prodigieux, c'était l'œuvre des dieux, qui voulaient faire passer un message). Par extension, le mot latin monstrum a désigné n'importe quel prodige, sans connotation péjorative ; et c'est dans ce sens qu'il a été repris en français, au XII e siècle.

Dans la mythologie, le mot monstre désigne un être fantastique. Le plus souvent, c'est un hybride, un mélange de plusieurs espèces : par exemple le Minotaure, qui est mi-homme, mi-taureau, ou l'Hydre de Lerne, qui a un corps de chien et sept têtes de serpents. Plus tard, on a appelé monstre marin la baleine, ou de gros poissons que l'on mangeait, et même des poulpes et des crustacés. Monstre est alors à comprendre dans le sens " animal étrange ".

Dès le XII e siècle, le mot monstre pouvait aussi s'appliquer à un homme avec une façon de vivre différente de la norme, ou bien avec un physique étrange, difforme, puis par extension, à un homme très laid. D'ailleurs, pendant longtemps, on a exhibé dans les foires des personnes avec une difformité (bossus, siamois, etc.), en les appelant monstres.

L'adjectif monstrueux et son adverbe dérivé monstrueusement font partie de la famille du mot monstre. On y trouve aussi le nom monstruosité, et des mots moins courants comme monstresse (" femme monstrueuse "), voire très rares comme monstrelet (" petit monstre ").

De façon plus large, les mots , moniteur, monument, prémonition descendent du verbe latin monere, tout comme monstre. Ils font donc partie d'une même grande famille de mots.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
L'origine du mot monstre remonte au verbe latin monere dont le sens religieux était " avertir, annoncer, éclairer "...

# data[].attributes.headline
Comment le discours permet-il l'élévation de la voix commune des mouvements sociaux ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Comment le discours permet-il l'élévation de la voix commune des mouvements sociaux ?

# data[].attributes.headline
Comment l'éloquence influence-t-elle le domaine des relations internationales?

# data[].attributes.subject
Comment l'éloquence influence-t-elle le domaine des relations internationales?

# data[].attributes.headline
Comment les nouvelles étiquettes de genres comme la non binarité prennent leur place dans notre société ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Comment les nouvelles étiquettes de genres comme la non binarité prennent leur place dans notre société ?

# data[].attributes.headline
Dans quelle mesure les discours sur le réchauffement climatique peuvent- ils éveiller une conscience environnementale ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Dans quelle mesure les discours sur le réchauffement climatique peuvent- ils éveiller une conscience environnementale ?

# data[].attributes.headline
La littérature doit-elle avoir des limites?

# data[].attributes.subject
La littérature doit-elle avoir des limites?