Why Putin Wants Alexei Navalny Dead

From Vox: “In 2006, a lawyer named Alex­ei Naval­ny start­ed a blog where he wrote about cor­rup­tion in his home coun­try of Rus­sia. It’s the most promi­nent prob­lem under the regime of Vladimir Putin, who has ruled Rus­sia since 2000. Putin has sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly tak­en over the country’s inde­pen­dent media, oli­garchy, elec­tions, and laws to cement his own pow­er and wield cor­rup­tion to his advan­tage.

That’s what Naval­ny set out to expose. And in 2010, he pub­lished a ground­break­ing inves­ti­ga­tion into a state-owned trans­porta­tion com­pa­ny, Transneft, which was fun­nel­ing state mon­ey into the hands of its exec­u­tives. The post launched Naval­ny into pol­i­tics.

By 2016, he had become the face of Russia’s oppo­si­tion move­ment, run for may­or, and was run­ning for pres­i­dent against Putin him­self. Naval­ny was uni­fy­ing Russia’s oppo­si­tion like no politi­cian had before. That’s why the Krem­lin tried to kill him. Naval­ny sur­vived the assas­si­na­tion attempt, launch­ing a move­ment nev­er before seen in Rus­sia.”

To dive deep­er into why the Russ­ian gov­ern­ment wants Naval­ny dead, watch the Vox video above, then lis­ten to this infor­ma­tive report from the New York Times’ Dai­ly Pod­cast below.

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. Or fol­low our posts on Threads, Face­book, BlueSky or Mastodon.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 2 ) |

The “Academic Tarot”: 22 Major Arcana Cards Representing Life in the Academic Humanities Under COVID-19

“Spec­u­la­tions about the cre­ators of Tarot cards include the Sufis, the Cathars, the Egyp­tians, Kab­bal­ists, and more,” writes “expert car­tomancer” Joshua Hehe. All of these sup­po­si­tions are wrong, it seems. “The actu­al his­tor­i­cal evi­dence points to north­ern Italy some­time in the ear­ly part of the 1400s,” when the so-called “major arcana” came into being. “Con­trary to what many have claimed, there is absolute­ly no proof of the Tarot hav­ing orig­i­nat­ed in any oth­er time or place.”

A bold claim, yet there are prece­dents much old­er than tarot: “A few decades before the Tarot was born, ordi­nary play­ing cards came to Europe by way of Arabs, arriv­ing in many dif­fer­ent cities between 1375 and 1378. These cards were an adap­ta­tion of the Islam­ic Mam­luk cards,” with suits of cups, swords, coins, and polo sticks, “the lat­ter of which were seen by Euro­peans as staves.”

Whether the play­ing cards invent­ed by the Mam­luks were used for div­ina­tion may be a mat­ter of con­tro­ver­sy. The his­to­ry and art of the Mam­luk sul­tanate itself is a sub­ject wor­thy of study for the tarot his­to­ri­an. Orig­i­nal­ly a slave army (“mam­luk” means “slave” in Ara­bic) under the Ayyu­bid sul­tans in Egypt and Syr­ia, the Mam­luks over­threw their rulers and cre­at­ed “the great­est Islam­ic empire of the lat­er Mid­dle Ages.”

What does this have to do with tarot read­ing? These are aca­d­e­m­ic con­cerns, per­haps, of lit­tle inter­est to the aver­age tarot enthu­si­ast. But then, the aver­age tarot enthu­si­ast is not the audi­ence for the “Aca­d­e­m­ic Tarot,” a project of the Vision­ary Futures Col­lec­tive, or VFC, a group of 22 schol­ars “fight­ing for what high­er edu­ca­tion needs most,” Stephanie Malak writes at Hyper­al­ler­gic, “a bring­ing togeth­er of thinkers who ‘believe in the trans­for­ma­tion­al pow­er and vital impor­tance of the human­i­ties.’”

To that end, the Aca­d­e­m­ic Tarot fea­tures exact­ly the kinds of char­ac­ters who love to chase down abstruse his­tor­i­cal questions—characters like the low­ly, con­fused Grad Stu­dent, stand­ing in here for The Fool. It also fea­tures those who can make aca­d­e­m­ic life, with its end­less rounds of meet­ings and com­mit­tees, so dif­fi­cult: fig­ures like The Pres­i­dent (see here), doing duty here as the Magi­cian, and pic­tured shred­ding “cam­pus-wide COVID results.”

The VFC, found­ed in the time of COVID-19 pan­dem­ic and “in the midst of the long-over­due nation­al reck­on­ing led by the Black Lives Mat­ter move­ment,” aims to “trace the con­tours of things that define our shared human con­di­tion,” says Col­lec­tive mem­ber Dr. Bri­an DeGrazia. In the case of the Aca­d­e­m­ic Tarot, the con­di­tions rep­re­sent­ed are shared by a spe­cif­ic sub­set of humans, many of whom respond­ed to “feel­ings sur­veys” put out by the VFC in a biweek­ly newslet­ter.

The sur­veys have been used to make art that reflects the expe­ri­ences of the grad stu­dents, pro­fes­sors, and pro­fes­sion­al staff work­ing the aca­d­e­m­ic human­i­ties at this time:

VFC artist-in-res­i­dence Claire Chenette, a Gram­my-nom­i­nat­ed Knoxville Sym­pho­ny Orches­tra musi­cian fur­loughed due to COVID-19, brought the tarot cards to life. What began as a three-card project to com­ple­ment the VFC newslet­ter grew in spir­it and in num­ber. 

“In tarot, the cards read us,” the VFC writes, “telling a sto­ry about our­selves that can pro­vide clar­i­ty, guid­ance and hope.” What sto­ry do the 22 Major Arcana cards in the Aca­d­e­m­ic Tarot tell? That depends on who’s ask­ing, as always, but one gets the sense that unless the quer­ent is famil­iar with life in a high­er-ed human­i­ties depart­ment, these cards may not reveal much. For those who have seen them­selves in the cards, how­ev­er, “the images made them laugh out loud,” says Chenette, or “they hit hard. Or… they even made them cry, but… it need­ed to hap­pen.”

Strug­gling through yet anoth­er pan­dem­ic semes­ter of attempt­ing to teach, research, write, and gen­er­al­ly stay afloat? The Aca­d­e­m­ic Tarot cards are cur­rent­ly sold out, but you can pre-order now for the sec­ond run.

via Hyper­al­ler­gic

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Divine Decks: A Visu­al His­to­ry of Tarot: The First Com­pre­hen­sive Sur­vey of Tarot Gets Pub­lished by Taschen

Behold the Sola-Bus­ca Tarot Deck, the Ear­li­est Com­plete Set of Tarot Cards (1490)

Sal­vador Dalí’s Tarot Cards Get Re-Issued: The Occult Meets Sur­re­al­ism in a Clas­sic Tarot Card Deck

Carl Jung: Tarot Cards Pro­vide Door­ways to the Uncon­scious, and Maybe a Way to Pre­dict the Future

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

The Breathtaking Courage of Harriet Tubman: An Animated History Lesson Speaks to Her Place on the $20 Bill

I was a con­duc­tor on the Under­ground Rail­road, and I can say what many oth­ers can­not. I nev­er ran my train off the track, and I nev­er lost a pas­sen­ger.  —Har­ri­et Tub­man

Remem­ber how one of the Oba­ma administration’s final ini­tia­tives was to redesign the $20 bill, ban­ish­ing Andrew Jack­son, a slave­hold­er, to a minor role on the back of the bill, in favor of abo­li­tion­ist Har­ri­et Tub­man, who was born into slav­ery?

The announce­ment arrived on the heels of a con­tro­ver­sy, after then-Trea­sury Sec­re­tary Jacob J. Lew enraged Amer­i­can women by going back on a promise to install a woman on the face of a new­ly designed $10 bill.

The deci­sion to keep Alexan­der Hamil­ton, archi­tect of our finan­cial sys­tem and the country’s first Trea­sury Sec­re­tary, in place is rumored to owe rather a lot to his sta­tus as the sub­ject of a cer­tain hit musi­cal that had opened ear­li­er in the year.

The offi­cial design of the Tub­man bill was to have been unveiled in 2020, to coin­cide with the hun­dredth anniver­sary of the 19th Amend­ment, which guar­an­teed a wom­an’s right to vote. Had all gone accord­ing to plan, it would have been in wide cir­cu­la­tion lat­er this decade.

At the time Lew was untrou­bled by the pos­si­bil­i­ty that the incom­ing admin­is­tra­tion might kill off the pro­posed makeover:

I don’t think somebody’s going to prob­a­bly want to do that — to take the image of Har­ri­et Tub­man off of our mon­ey? To take the image of the suf­frag­ists off?

It seems, how­ev­er, that some­one did want to do that.

In 2016, pres­i­den­tial can­di­date Don­ald Trump told NBC that replac­ing Jack­son with Tub­man was “pure polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness,” sug­gest­ing instead that a place might be found for Tub­man on the $2 bill… which is no longer print­ed.

He also report­ed­ly remarked to for­mer White House advis­er Omarosa Mani­gault New­man, “You want me to put that face on the twen­ty-dol­lar bill?”

The Trea­sury Depart­ment website’s revi­sion in the wake of the 2016 elec­tion scrubbed all ref­er­ences to planned changes to the cur­ren­cy.

Lew’s replace­ment, Trea­sury Sec­re­tary Steven Mnuchin, final­ly announced that the new $20 bill wouldn’t be ready until 2028, and that the fin­ished design might not include Tub­man at all. He attrib­uted this to tech­ni­cal rea­sons relat­ing to secu­ri­ty fea­tures, though a Trea­sury Depart­ment employ­ee told The New York Times that the engrav­ing plate for it was com­plet­ed “as recent­ly as May 2018” and that the design “appeared to be far along in the process.”

Cer­tain­ly, there were big­ger sto­ries in 2020 than the absence of the promised Har­ri­et Tub­man $20 bill, but the obfus­ca­tion and delay were mad­den­ing giv­en every­thing Tub­man, a woman of action, was able to accom­plish well over a hun­dred years ago.

Most of us are famil­iar with her promi­nence on the Under­ground Rail­road, which led to the sobri­quet “Moses of her peo­ple,” but there are sev­er­al things in the above ani­mat­ed TED-Ed les­son by Janell Hob­son, Depart­ment Chair of Wom­en’s, Gen­der and Sex­u­al­i­ty Stud­ies at SUNY Albany, that may come as news to you.

Of par­tic­u­lar note, Tub­man was the first woman in US his­to­ry to plan and lead a mil­i­tary raid, result­ing in the lib­er­a­tion of near­ly 700 enslaved per­sons in South Car­oli­na.

Her sec­ond hus­band, Nel­son Davis, also born into slav­ery, had been a Union sol­dier, which enti­tled her to a pen­sion of $8 as a mil­i­tary wid­ow.

She fought hard for an increase on the basis of her own ser­vice to the Union Army, enlist­ing var­i­ous friends and sup­port­ers to lob­by on her behalf, includ­ing Lincoln’s Sec­re­tary of State, William Seward, who said, “I have known her long as a noble high spir­it, as true as sel­dom dwells in the human form.”

Final­ly, in 1899, her pen­sion was increased to $20 a month.

Pro­fes­sor Hob­son, whose les­son pre­dates Mnuchin’s announce­ment of the stall, called the denom­i­na­tion “a fit­ting twist of fate.”

As is the rub­ber stamp that artist Dano Wal cre­at­ed to help dis­gust­ed Amer­i­cans con­vert Jack­sons into Tub­mans with­out the help of the Trea­sury Depart­ment:

Who we choose to hon­or as a soci­ety affects the moral atti­tudes that are baked into us as we grow up. The impact that see­ing the face of Har­ri­et Tub­man star­ing back at you from a $20 bill should not be under­es­ti­mat­ed. This sort of rep­re­sen­ta­tion can sub­tly but deeply affect some­one’s con­cep­tion of them­selves and their place in soci­ety. The slight­ly sub­ver­sive nature of it being cur­ren­cy that’s been hand-stamped by anoth­er human makes a dis­cov­ery of one of these bills all the more joy­ous.

Good news looms on the hori­zon. Less than a week into the Biden admin­is­tra­tion, the Trea­sury Depart­ment con­firmed that the agency is “explor­ing ways to resume” putting Har­ri­et Tub­man on the bill, as well as ways to has­ten their release. She will be the first female and first Black Amer­i­can to be fea­tured on our fold­ing mon­ey.

TED-Ed has a list of addi­tion­al resources for those who’d like to delve deep­er into Tubman’s life and lega­cy, as well as a dis­cus­sion as to whether putting Tubman’s face on the $20 bill is a fit­ting hon­or.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Design­er Cre­ates a 3D-Print­ed Stamp That Replaces Andrew Jack­son with Har­ri­et Tub­man on the $20 Bill

What the Text­books Don’t Tell Us About The Atlantic Slave Trade: An Ani­mat­ed Video Fills In His­tor­i­cal Gaps

The Names of 1.8 Mil­lion Eman­ci­pat­ed Slaves Are Now Search­able in the World’s Largest Genealog­i­cal Data­base, Help­ing African Amer­i­cans Find Lost Ances­tors

Ayun Hal­l­i­day is an author, illus­tra­tor, the­ater mak­er and Chief Pri­ma­tol­o­gist of the East Vil­lage Inky zine.  Fol­low her @AyunHalliday.

Watch Amanda Gorman Read “The Hill We Climb,” “Making Mountains As We Run,” “Fury and Faith,” and More

Led by celebri­ty host Tom Han­ks, the Biden inauguration’s enter­tain­ers, A‑listers all, were safe bets, reli­able sta­di­um-fillers with instant mass appeal. They “did exact­ly what we need­ed them to do,” remarked Stephanie Zacharek at TIME, offer­ing the reas­sur­ance that “we no longer need to live in dread.” They were “singers you actu­al­ly know,” Alex­is Petridis wrote at The Guardian. The com­ment was a dig at the pre­vi­ous administration’s C and D‑list line­up, and also, per­haps, an admis­sion that what Amer­i­cans most crave is the famil­iar, which, of course, means, first and fore­most, a nation­al focus on celebri­ties we all know and love.

For a moment, how­ev­er, this rep­e­ti­tion of com­fort­ing house­hold names was punc­tu­at­ed by an entire­ly new young face and voice—that of a poet, no less, a stan­dard bear­er of the form that has held the nation’s rapt atten­tion in the work of Whit­man, Frost, Hugh­es, and Angelou.

Aman­da Gor­man, cho­sen as the first Nation­al Youth Poet Lau­re­ate in 2017, chan­neled a tra­di­tion of Amer­i­can lyric writ­ing about Amer­i­ca in her inau­gu­ra­tion poem, and she brought to it her own expe­ri­ences as a Gen Z black fem­i­nist and activist who over­came a speech imped­i­ment to address the coun­try at one of the most sig­nif­i­cant tele­vised pub­lic events in recent his­to­ry.

Gorman’s resume is a tes­ta­ment to her generation’s com­mit­ment to art and activism in the face of com­pound­ing crises, and to her per­son­al com­mit­ment to change in a coun­try that promis­es lit­tle for young black artists in par­tic­u­lar. Named youth poet lau­re­ate of Los Ange­les in 2014 at age 16, she pub­lished her first book of poet­ry, The One for Whom Food is Not Enough, the fol­low­ing year. She then went on to found a non­prof­it writ­ing and lead­er­ship pro­gram, open the lit­er­ary sea­son for the Library of Con­gress in 2017, and grad­u­ate cum laude from Har­vard Col­lege with a degree in soci­ol­o­gy in 2020.

While chart­ing her own lit­er­ary path, Gor­man learned to use her voice as “a polit­i­cal choice,” as she says in her TED-Ed stu­dent talk above, in which she con­fi­dent­ly asks a small audi­ence of her peers, “whose shoul­ders do you stand on?” and “what do you stand for?” These are the ques­tions she asks stu­dents in work­shops, she says, to shake them out of the idea that poet­ry is for “dead white men who were just born to be old.” Then she shares her own answers. Gorman’s pub­lic appear­ances tend to focus on process as much as on pol­i­tics and prosody. In a talk on “Pre­sen­ta­tion and Read­ing” at the Acad­e­my of Arts & Sci­ences in Cam­bridge below, she reads a poem, then has a brief dis­cus­sion of “how it came to be.”

Gor­man is as skilled a sto­ry­teller as she is a poet and edu­ca­tor. In her 2017 Moth Grand­SLAM appear­ance in Boston, fur­ther up, she tells the sto­ry of try­ing to catch her big break audi­tion­ing for Broad­way, an aspi­ra­tion shaped by her child­hood love of The Lion King. Her inau­gur­al poem, she tells PBS, was writ­ten to “be acces­si­ble to any­one who might be watch­ing, that they can feel that they are rep­re­sent­ed and well-estab­lished in this poem,” an act of writ­ing she calls “a real­ly dif­fi­cult dance to do.” The effort did not blunt the poem’s most inci­sive lines, how­ev­er, includ­ing its ref­er­ence to “the bel­ly of the beast,” in which “we’ve learned that qui­et isn’t always peace.”

For Gor­man, speak­ing out is a per­son­al imper­a­tive she honed as “a form of a pathol­o­gy,” over­com­ing her speech issues “by embark­ing on spo­ken word over and over and over again and recit­ing my poems. No mat­ter how ter­ri­fied I was, because I had the sup­port of oth­ers, I was able to kind of slow­ly climb my way to the place I am at today.”

For mil­lions of young peo­ple who watched the inau­gu­ra­tion, it will be Gorman’s sto­ry of per­se­ver­ance, com­mu­ni­ty, per­son­al growth, and refusal to be pas­sive and silent in the face of social injus­tice that will most res­onate, per­haps for the rest of their lives, amidst cel­e­bra­tions of a longed-for return to the famil­iar. See Gor­man read more of her poet­ry above and below, includ­ing a poem for anoth­er inau­gu­ra­tion, that of Har­vard Pres­i­dent Lawrence S. Bacow, in 2018.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Joy Har­jo, New­ly-Appoint­ed U.S. Poet Lau­re­ate, Reads Her Poems, “Remem­ber,” “A Poem to Get Rid of Fear,” “An Amer­i­can Sun­rise” and More

Lis­ten to Robert Frost Read ‘The Gift Out­right,’ the Poem He Recit­ed from Mem­o­ry at JFK’s Inau­gu­ra­tion

Ani­mat­ed Poet­ry by US Poet Lau­re­ate

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Pussy Riot’s Nadya Tolokonnikova Tells Protestors What to Do–and Not Do–If Arrested by Authoritarian Police


Note: If the sub­ti­tles don’t play auto­mat­i­cal­ly, please click the “cc” at the bot­tom of the video.

Oli­garchic regimes built on cor­rup­tion and naked self-inter­est don’t typ­i­cal­ly exhib­it much in the way of cre­ativ­i­ty when respond­ing to crises of legit­i­ma­cy. The most recent chal­lenge to the oli­garchic rule of Vladimir Putin, for exam­ple, after the attempt­ed assas­si­na­tion and jail­ing of his rival, anti-cor­rup­tion activist Alex­ey Naval­ny, revealed “the regime’s utter lack of imag­i­na­tion and inabil­i­ty to plan ahead,” writes Masha Gessen at The New York­er, and seems to promise an open­ing for a rev­o­lu­tion­ary move­ment.

Per­haps it’s safer to say, Joshua Yaf­fa writes, “that Russ­ian pol­i­tics are mere­ly enter­ing the begin­ning of a pro­tract­ed new phase,” that will involve more large, coor­di­nat­ed mass protests against the “per­ceived impuni­ty and law­less­ness of Putin’s sys­tem,” such as hap­pened all over the coun­try in recent days: “In St. Peters­burg, a siz­able crowd blocked Nevsky Prospekt, the city’s main thor­ough­fare. Sev­er­al thou­sand gath­ered in Novosi­birsk, the largest city in Siberia. Even in Yakut­sk, a far­away region­al cap­i­tal, where the day’s tem­per­a­tures reached minus fifty-eight degrees Fahren­heit, a num­ber of peo­ple came out to the cen­tral square.”

Footage from the protests “shows activists pelt­ing Russ­ian riot police and vehi­cles with snow­balls,” Dazed reports. Mas­sive, in-real-life protests have been orga­nized and sup­port­ed by online activists on Tik Tok, YouTube, and oth­er social media sites, where young peo­ple like viral teenag­er Neu­rol­era share tips—such as pre­tend­ing to be an indig­nant Amer­i­can—that might help pro­tes­tors avoid arrest. In one video call­ing on young stu­dents to attend Saturday’s protests, a young woman holds a book, and cap­tions “explain how she is read­ing about how cit­i­zens’ rights are guar­an­teed,” writes Bren­dan Cole at Newsweek. “But wait!” she says in one cap­tion, “In Rus­sia things hap­pen dif­fer­ent­ly.”

Russ­ian cit­i­zens, and espe­cial­ly young activists, do not walk into protest sit­u­a­tions unpre­pared for arrest and detention—particularly those who fol­low long­time trou­ble-mak­ers Pussy Riot, famous for stag­ing flam­boy­ant anti-Putin protests and get­ting arrest­ed. In the video at the top, the band/activist collective’s Nadya Tolokon­niko­va explains “how to behave when you’re arrest­ed.” Deten­tion “is an unpleas­ant expe­ri­ence,” she says, but it need not “end up being such a trau­mat­ic expe­ri­ence.” One must con­quer fear with knowl­edge. Dur­ing her first arrest, “I was scared because I felt that the police offi­cers held an enor­mous pow­er over me. That’s not true.”

The Eng­lish trans­la­tion seems inex­act and many of the intri­ca­cies of Russ­ian law will not trans­late to oth­er nation­al con­texts. Woven through­out the video, how­ev­er, are gen­er­al­ly pru­dent tips—like not adding crim­i­nal charges by attack­ing police dur­ing arrest. Last year, the group dis­trib­uted anti-sur­veil­lance make-up tips also use­ful to activists every­where. The viral spread of videos like Pussy Riot’s and Neurolera’s tuto­r­i­al show us a world­wide desire for youth­ful hope and deter­mi­na­tion in the face of bru­tal real­i­ties. Yaf­fa describes the “scenes of police employ­ing brute force” that filled his Russ­ian-lan­guage social media dur­ing the protests:

In one such video, from St. Peters­burg, a woman con­fronts a col­umn of riot police­men drag­ging a pro­test­er by his arms and asks, “Why are you arrest­ing him?” One of the police offi­cers kicks her in the chest, knock­ing her to the ground. Watch­ing these scenes, I couldn’t help but think of Belarus, where months of street protests against the rule of Alexan­der Lukashen­ka have been marked by bru­tal­i­ty and tor­ture by the secu­ri­ty forces, and a remark­able will­ing­ness from pro­test­ers to fight back against riot police, at times forc­ing them to retreat or aban­don mak­ing an arrest.

These images do not spread so read­i­ly in Eng­lish-lan­guage media, per­haps giv­ing a super­fi­cial impres­sion that the cur­rent anti-Putin, pro-Naval­ny move­ment is a new, young online phe­nom­e­non, rather than the con­tin­u­a­tion of a bat­tle-hard­ened resis­tance to twen­ty years of mis­rule. “Throw­ing the book at Naval­ny could spark protests of unde­ter­mined strength and longevi­ty,” Yaf­fa argues, from which mass move­ments around the world draw inspi­ra­tion for years to come.

via Dazed

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

A His­to­ry of Pussy Riot: Watch the Band’s Ear­ly Performances/Protests Against the Putin Regime

Slavoj Žižek & Pussy Riot’s Nadezh­da Tolokon­niko­va Exchange An Extra­or­di­nary Series of Let­ters

Pussy Riot Releas­es First Video in a Year, Tak­ing on Russ­ian Oil Prof­its and Oth­er High-Pro­file Tar­gets

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

What Can You Do About QAnon?: A Short Take from Documentary Filmmaker Kirby Ferguson

You know that QAnon sup­port­ers fig­ured promi­nent­ly in the Capi­tol insur­rec­tion. Two QAnon con­spir­a­cy the­o­rists now hold seats in Con­gress. And per­haps you read the dis­turb­ing pro­file this week­end about the QAnon sup­port­er who attend­ed the elite Dal­ton School in Man­hat­tan and then Har­vard. So–you’re maybe thinking–it’s final­ly worth under­stand­ing what QAnon is, and what we can do about it. Above, watch a 10 minute Op-Doc from film­mak­er Kir­by Fer­gu­son, whose work we’ve fea­tured here before. As you’ll see, his rec­om­men­da­tions (from late Octo­ber) align with expert advice found in our recent post, How to Talk with a Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rist: What the Experts Rec­om­mend. After the vio­lence of Jan­u­ary 6, how­ev­er, it’s rea­son­able to ask whether we need some­thing more than cod­dling and patience.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Con­stant­ly Wrong: Film­mak­er Kir­by Fer­gu­son Makes the Case Against Con­spir­a­cy The­o­ries

How to Talk with a Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rist: What the Experts Rec­om­mend

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 7 ) |

How to Talk with a Conspiracy Theorist: What the Experts Recommend

Why do peo­ple pledge alle­giance to views that seem fun­da­men­tal­ly hos­tile to real­i­ty? Maybe believ­ers in shad­owy, evil forces and secret cabals fall prey to moti­vat­ed rea­son­ing. Truth for them is what they need to believe in order to get what they want. Their cer­tain­ty in the just­ness of a cause can feel as com­fort­ing as a warm blan­ket on a winter’s night. But con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries go far­ther than pri­vate delu­sions of grandeur. They have spilled into the streets, into the halls of the U.S. Capi­tol build­ing and var­i­ous state­hous­es. Con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries about a “stolen” 2020 elec­tion are out for blood.

As dis­tress­ing as such recent pub­lic spec­ta­cles seem at present, they hard­ly come near the harm accom­plished by pro­pa­gan­da like Plan­dem­ic—a short film that claims the COVID-19 cri­sis is a sin­is­ter plot—part of a wave of dis­in­for­ma­tion that has sent infec­tion and death rates soar­ing into the hun­dreds of thou­sands.

We may nev­er know the num­bers of peo­ple who have infect­ed oth­ers by refus­ing to take pre­cau­tions for them­selves, but we do know that the num­ber of peo­ple in the U.S. who believe con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries is alarm­ing­ly high.

A Pew Research sur­vey of adults in the U.S. “found that 36% thought that these con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries” about the elec­tion and the pan­dem­ic “were prob­a­bly or def­i­nite­ly true,” Tanya Basu writes at the MIT Tech­nol­o­gy Review. “Per­haps some of these peo­ple are your fam­i­ly, your friends, your neigh­bors.” Maybe you are con­spir­a­cy the­o­rist your­self. After all, “it’s very human and nor­mal to believe in con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries…. No one is above [them]—not even you.” We all resist facts, as Cass Sun­stein (author of Con­spir­a­cy The­o­ries and Oth­er Dan­ger­ous Ideas) says in the Vox video above, that con­tra­dict cher­ished beliefs and the com­mu­ni­ties of peo­ple who hold them.

So how do we dis­tin­guish between real­i­ty-based views and con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries if we’re all so prone to the lat­ter? Stan­dards of log­i­cal rea­son­ing and evi­dence still help sep­a­rate truth from false­hood in lab­o­ra­to­ries. When it comes to the human mind, emo­tions are just as impor­tant as data. “Con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries make peo­ple feel as though they have some sort of con­trol over the world,” says Daniel Romer, a psy­chol­o­gist and research direc­tor at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Pennsylvania’s Annen­berg Pub­lic Pol­i­cy Cen­ter. They’re air­tight, as Wired shows below, and it can be use­less to argue.

Basu spoke with experts like Romer and the mod­er­a­tors of Reddit’s r/ChangeMyView com­mu­ni­ty to find out how to approach oth­ers who hold beliefs that cause harm and have no basis in fact. The con­sen­sus rec­om­mends pro­ceed­ing with kind­ness, find­ing some com­mon ground, and apply­ing a degree of restraint, which includes drop­ping or paus­ing the con­ver­sa­tion if things get heat­ed. We need to rec­og­nize com­pet­ing moti­va­tions: “some peo­ple don’t want to change, no mat­ter the facts.”

Unreg­u­lat­ed emo­tions can and do under­mine our abil­i­ty to rea­son all the time. We can­not ignore or dis­miss them; they can be clear indi­ca­tions some­thing has gone wrong with our think­ing and per­haps with our men­tal and phys­i­cal health. We are all sub­ject­ed, though not equal­ly, to incred­i­ble amounts of height­ened stress under our cur­rent con­di­tions, which allows bad actors like the still-cur­rent U.S. Pres­i­dent to more eas­i­ly exploit uni­ver­sal human vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties and “weaponize moti­vat­ed rea­son­ing,” as Uni­ver­si­ty of Cal­i­for­nia, Irvine social psy­chol­o­gist Peter Dit­to observes.

To help counter these ten­den­cies in some small way, we present the resources above. In Bill Nye’s Big Think answer to a video ques­tion from a view­er named Daniel, the long­time sci­ence com­mu­ni­ca­tor talks about the dis­com­fort of cog­ni­tive dis­so­nance. “The way to over­come that,” he says, is with the atti­tude, “we’re all in this togeth­er. Let’s learn about this togeth­er.”

We can per­haps best approach those who embrace harm­ful con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries by not imme­di­ate­ly telling them that we know more than they do. It’s a con­ver­sa­tion that requires some intel­lec­tu­al humil­i­ty and acknowl­edge­ment that change is hard and it feels real­ly scary not to know what’s going on. Below, see an abridged ver­sion of MIT Tech­nol­o­gy Review’s ten tips for rea­son­ing with a con­spir­a­cy the­o­rist, and read Basu’s full arti­cle here.

  1. Always, always speak respect­ful­ly: “With­out respect, com­pas­sion, and empa­thy, no one will open their mind or heart to you. No one will lis­ten.”
  2. Go pri­vate: Using direct mes­sages when online “pre­vents dis­cus­sion from get­ting embar­rass­ing for the poster, and it implies a gen­uine com­pas­sion and inter­est in con­ver­sa­tion rather than a desire for pub­lic sham­ing.”
  3. Test the waters first: “You can ask what it would take to change their mind, and if they say they will nev­er change their mind, then you should take them at their word and not both­er engag­ing.”
  4. Agree: “Con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries often fea­ture ele­ments that every­one can agree on.”
  5. Try the “truth sand­wich”: “Use the fact-fal­la­cy-fact approach, a method first pro­posed by lin­guist George Lakoff.”
  6. Or use the Socrat­ic method: This “chal­lenges peo­ple to come up with sources and defend their posi­tion them­selves.”
  7. Be very care­ful with loved ones: “Bit­ing your tongue and pick­ing your bat­tles can help your men­tal health.”
  8. Real­ize that some peo­ple don’t want to change, no mat­ter the facts.
  9. If it gets bad, stop: “One r/ChangeMyView mod­er­a­tor sug­gest­ed ‘IRL calm­ing down’: shut­ting off your phone or com­put­er and going for a walk.”
  10. Every lit­tle bit helps. “One con­ver­sa­tion will prob­a­bly not change a person’s mind, and that’s okay.”

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Con­stant­ly Wrong: Film­mak­er Kir­by Fer­gu­son Makes the Case Against Con­spir­a­cy The­o­ries

Neil Arm­strong Sets Straight an Inter­net Truther Who Accused Him of Fak­ing the Moon Land­ing (2000)

Michio Kaku & Noam Chom­sky School Moon Land­ing and 9/11 Con­spir­a­cy The­o­rists

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Social Psychologist Erich Fromm Diagnoses Why People Wear a Mask of Happiness in Modern Society (1977)

Mod­ern man still is anx­ious and tempt­ed to sur­ren­der his free­dom to dic­ta­tors of all kinds, or to lose it by trans­form­ing him­self into a small cog in the machine. —Erich Fromm

There are more think pieces pub­lished every day than any one per­son can read about our cur­rent moment of social dis­in­te­gra­tion. But we seem to have lost touch with the insights of social psy­chol­o­gy, a field that dom­i­nat­ed pop­u­lar intel­lec­tu­al dis­course in the post-war 20th cen­tu­ry, large­ly due to the influ­en­tial work of Ger­man exiles like Erich Fromm. The human­ist philoso­pher and psychologist’s “pre­scient 1941 trea­sure Escape from Free­dom,writes Maria Popo­va, serves as what he called “‘a diag­no­sis rather than a prog­no­sis,’ writ­ten dur­ing humanity’s grimmest descent into mad­ness in WWII, lay­ing out the foun­da­tion­al ideas on which Fromm would lat­er draw in con­sid­er­ing the basis of a sane soci­ety,” the title of his 1955 study of alien­ation, con­for­mi­ty, and author­i­tar­i­an­ism.

Fromm “is an unjust­ly neglect­ed fig­ure,” Kier­an Durkin argues at Jacobin, “cer­tain­ly when com­pared with his erst­while Frank­furt School col­leagues, such as Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno.” But he has much to offer as a “ground­ed alter­na­tive” to their crit­i­cal the­o­ry, and his work “reveals a dis­tinct­ly more opti­mistic and hope­ful engage­ment with the ques­tion of rad­i­cal social change.” Nonethe­less, Fromm well under­stood that social dis­eases must be iden­ti­fied before they can be treat­ed, and he did not sug­ar­coat his diag­noses. Had soci­ety become more “sane” thir­ty-plus years after the war? Fromm didn’t think so.

In the 1977 inter­view clip above, Fromm defends his claim that “We live in a soci­ety of noto­ri­ous­ly unhap­py peo­ple,” which the inter­view­er calls an “incred­i­ble state­ment.” Fromm replies:

For me it isn’t incred­i­ble at all, but if you just open your eyes, you see it. That is, most peo­ple pre­tend that they are hap­py, even to them­selves, because if you are unhap­py, you are con­sid­ered a fail­ure, so you must wear the mask of being sat­is­fied, of hap­py.

Con­trast this obser­va­tion with Albert Camus’ 1959 state­ment, “Today hap­pi­ness is like a crimenev­er admit it. Don’t say ‘I’m hap­py’ oth­er­wise you will hear con­dem­na­tion all around.” Were Fromm and Camus observ­ing vast­ly dif­fer­ent cul­tur­al worlds? Or is it pos­si­ble that in the inter­ven­ing years, forced hap­pi­nessakin to the social­ly coerced emo­tions Camus depict­ed in The Strangerhad become nor­mal­ized, a screen of denial stretched over exis­ten­tial dread, eco­nom­ic exploita­tion, and social decay?

Fromm’s diag­no­sis of forced hap­pi­ness res­onates strong­ly with The Stranger (and Bil­lie Hol­i­day), and with the image-obsessed soci­ety in which we live most of our lives now, pre­sent­ing var­i­ous curat­ed per­son­ae on social media and video­con­fer­enc­ing apps. Unhap­pi­ness may be a byprod­uct of depres­sion, vio­lence, pover­ty, phys­i­cal ill­ness, social alien­ation… but its man­i­fes­ta­tions pro­duce even more of the same: “Them that’s got shall get / Them that’s not shall lose.” If you’re unhap­py, says Fromm, “you lose cred­it on the mar­ket, you’re no longer a nor­mal per­son or a capa­ble per­son. But you just have to look at peo­ple. You only have to see how behind the mask there is unrest.”

Have we learned how to look at peo­ple behind the mask? Is it pos­si­ble to do so when we most­ly inter­act with them from behind a screen? These are the kinds of ques­tions Fromm’s work can help us grap­ple with, if we’re will­ing to accept his diag­no­sis and tru­ly reck­on with our unhap­pi­ness.

Relat­ed Con­tent: 

Albert Camus Explains Why Hap­pi­ness Is Like Com­mit­ting a Crime—”You Should Nev­er Admit to it” (1959)

How Much Mon­ey Do You Need to Be Hap­py? A New Study Gives Us Some Exact Fig­ures

The UN’s World Hap­pi­ness Report Ranks “Social­ist Friend­ly” Coun­tries like Fin­land, Nor­way, Den­mark, Ice­land & Swe­den as Among the Hap­pi­est in the World

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.