Evan and Gordon Talk: “Super-Independence”

GORDON: Well Comrades, welcome to the Culture War Reporter’s off-grid, self-sustaining commune. Pour yourself some Kool-Aid and make yourself comfortable as Evan and I debate the merits of the movement.

EVAN: While we ended our last segment stating that we were going to discuss the state of the church, starting off tonight we realized a few things.

a) We can’t for the life of us find this phantom comment by Joseph suggesting such a topic [though I swear I read it].

b) We already talked about one of his topics [“Manly” culture  and live-off-the-land primitivism has been around for ages (it’s just getting better publicity).

Now as both of us have grown up in the Third-World, our views on the subject might be slanted a bit. For us, people raising chickens or living as farmers isn’t as strange as it may be for people in the West.

EVAN: As a little context, as usual, I have lived in both the Philippines and Thailand, and visited Malaysia and China-

GORDON: Syria, most extensively, though I’ve visited Egypt, Thailand, and plenty of other countries.

EVAN: So yeah, like Gordon said, eating out of a garden in one’s backyard is not a strange thing. We had a huge mango tree in our front yard in the Philippines, and a rambutan tree in the back. Eating food not bought at a local supermarket was no strange thing.

But at the present we [and most of you, as the site statistics indicate] live in North America, where this is very much not the case.

GORDON: Let’s get right down to it- is this some remnant of bygone hippy days, or is this a new trend we’re seeing?

EVAN: I like to think that it’s a new trend, mostly because what’s going on currently is a backlash against present-day issues. We realize now more than ever how unsustainable first world living is, and as a result we’re trying to live differently.

GORDON: I’d question just how prevalent the movement actually is, but as I doubt either of us has actual (or accurate) stats on the issue, why don’t we talk a bit about how we feel about this.

Is this a good solution? Is it supposed to be a solution? Gimme some thoughts here.

EVAN: Well, if you’re referring to it as a reaction to unsustainability [as I mentioned], it’s a solution as long as it grows as a movement [like you said, its size as a movement is debatable]. Living this way certainly can’t hurt, but more people have to do it to make a difference.

So to answer whether or not it’s supposed to be a solution, I think yes. But provided that it’s adopted by others on a larger scale. And yes, I think it’s a good solution. People changing their lifestyles will in turn change how companies do business. The thing is that a vast majority will have to in order for this to happen.

GORDON: I certainly don’t disagree- but the implementation is kinda throwing me here. I’ve heard the criticism (heck, made the criticism) that sustainable living is a hobby that the wealthy and privileged alone can enjoy. I don’t see the average poor and working class American (i.e., most all Americans) spending thousands of dollars buying organic food- I definitely don’t see ‘em growing it themselves.

Or at least, not without a major overhaul of urban zoning laws.

EVAN: Well, I don’t think the act of eating organic food is really what Hannah was getting at here, more the fact that people are creating more, buying less. I do take your point about being able to garden to begin with into consideration; it’s a very valid point.

Ultimately it’s not just a food thing, it’s doing stuff like buying clothes at thrift stores [which I don't think anyone can deny is at an all-time high] and looking for used items on Craigslist or what have you.

You knew this GIF was coming…

GORDON: Well, it’s great that we can do all those things, don’t get me wrong, but ultimately it seems we’re just treating symptoms here. We save on clothes and gas, sure, but that money is still getting taken out of our hands and being used for destructive ends- either by our governments or or corporate  slave-masters. Again, what we’re doing is good- but it seems so small in the grand scale of things.

EVAN: Wait, what money is still being taken out of our hands? You’re going to have to be a little more specific.

GORDON: Well, just for simplicity’s sake, if I save 100 bucks, where does that money go? It gets split up lots of places- often to businesses that aren’t good, or if any of it DOES make it to a sustainable/organic/fair trade business, it’s too little to be ultimately effective. Even on a mass scale, we are, at best, reducing the severity of the problem by a single notch.

Not saying we shouldn’t- just saying that it’s not the answer.

EVAN: Granted, it may not be the answer, but I don’t think you’re giving it much credit at all.

GORDON: Then I’m coming across wrong-

I DO like this stuff, I really and truly do. It’s good when a few people do it and great when lots of people do. But it comes down to these two key points:

(1) Too many people think that thrift shopping or buying organic or having an herb garden is the solution (or all THEY have to do) to save the world

(2) Even if it was, we have a paltry number of people actually taking this seriously at all

EVAN: So to bring this back to our suggested topic, this trend is either being seen as more effective that it really is, or not being viewed as a lifestyle that ultimately benefits everyone. We both like the idea of of a life that incorporates home gardens [however small], purchasing used items, and dumpster diving, but to turn things back over to you, what more can we do?

GORDON: Actively combating the people causing the problems would seem to be a logical step (Nestle, Coca-Cola, Obama’s Administration, Monsanto, etc.)

EVAN: Have you done a Shame Day post for either Monsanto or Nestle?

GORDON: Not yet.

EVAN: To shine a little light on what Gordon’s done in the past, he actively campaigned at our college to place a full boycott on the Coca-Cola corporation.

Since meeting him I’ve personally stopped purchasing/using both Coca-Cola and Nestle products, though I do lapse unknowingly [stupid Minute Maid]. My reasons for boycotting both have had to do with finding out about the highly unethical business practices carried out by both companies.

GORDON: Ooh- Nike too. **** Nike.

EVAN: Someone posted on one of my articles this past week about how there’s certainly a sort of shared bias on this blog, and he was not wrong.

I think to clarify, however, there are things that Gordon and I disagree about [heck, read a lot of our past E&GTs]. What I do want to communicate, though, is that where we line up is acknowledging and respecting human rights, placing people first and looking down upon those who would disenfranchise them, either through the products sold do them or through misrepresenting them in the media.

GORDON: I must’ve missed that comment. But yeah, the fact that we agree a lot doesn’t make us wrong. But back to the point. What would YOU like to see as an addition to all this?

EVAN: I’d like people to realize that spending time and money is not in and of itself a bad thing. Yes, a garden is time consuming, but it’s incredibly beneficial. Shelling out a few more dollars for what is ultimately a better product created by a company that treats its workers well is so much better for the whole world than paying less for unethically produced items that won’t last.

People need to realize that living well involves a little sacrifice.

GORDON: Ain’t that the truth.

And speaking of sacrifice, we’ve put in our time for this evening. As always, be sure to leave comment for next week’s discussion (PLEASE be specific).

EVAN: Thanks for tuning in, and of course feel free to add to our discussion if you feel so led. Any words you have to share are always usually appreciated.

2 Broke Girls, S2E23 “And the Tip Slip”: A TV Review

tipslipLet me begin by saying that this week’s cold open was a wonderful representation of the show as a well-run ensemble comedy. Max and Caroline are ragging on Has as usual, yes, but he retorts, and Oleg and Earl are not far behind with their own comments. It’s light, snappy, and most importantly funny. Considering that I’m more than likely going to be reviewing this into the next year, this is the show I want to be watching every Monday night.

After the theme song we see that the girls are back at the prison to visit Caroline’s father, who, if I remember correctly, hasn’t appeared since the first episode of this season. Martin Channing, played by Steven Weber, is always a great addition to an episode. His trying to look after his daughter through Max [an unlikely source of love/protection] has always added a lot to the girls’ interactions with one another.

Since Mr. Channing has been put away in white collar prison for swindling thousands it’s to be expected that one day someone would write a shocking exposé on his life. This takes the form of Sandra Rosenthal, an accountant formerly in the Channing’s employ who could not do math. After shooing Caroline away Mr. Channing tells Max that the “shocking” takes the form of her stating that he has a small penis. After Caroline finds out from Max, she decides to join Sandra on Piers Morgan Tonight to expose her book for being what it is: a lie.

Back at the diner everyone already know about the rumor concerning her father’s genitals; Oleg finds out because he has the word “penis” keyed in as a Google Alert. This is all understandably stressing Caroline out, and to ease her tension Han gives her one of the creepiest massages I’ve ever seen. Sophie saves the poor girl by offering to take both her and Max to her fancy spa, though it should be mentioned that Caroline puts up with Han’s creepy baby spider massage for an impressive amount of time. 

Now is the time for me to state that the scenes within the spa are really, really good. This show doesn’t often make me so much as smirk, but there was a moment where decent writing and good acting lined up, creating some legitimately funny moments.

First up, the girls are chatting it up a sort of lounge area post-massage. This one woman shushes them, prompting Caroline to tell Max that this is a quiet room. Soon after Sophie enters, loud and boisterous as always. When she is inevitably shushed her reaction is to hurl a lemon at the woman, and that was really well done. Sophie, and Jennifer Coolidge in general, is not a character I particularly enjoy, but this was a really great moment in that it characterizes her in a single action. Sophie is like honey badger in that Sophie doesn’t care; she does what she wants.

Then Sandra enters for her own massage, and Caroline and Max sneak in, the former to pose as her masseuse and the latter . . . to . . . be herself? There is a lot of funny in this scene, so let me try to encapsulate it all.

Caroline masks her voice by making it deeper, and I don’t know how to pin it down, but it is hilarious. She believes, for some reason, that pushing one side of a person’s body constitutes a massage. Max constantly hitting a bunch of wind chimes was a visual gag that began to get tired, but actually got better as it went on. The two girls throwing hot stones back and forth to each other was another great example of physical humor. This is 2 Broke Girls at its best. Goofy and silly without being dirty and crass, two friends getting into antics without rape or masturbation jokes thrown about willy nilly. It was really legitimately great stuff. Anyway, Sandra find out it’s them but Sophie very menacingly talks her out of accusing Caroline of harassment, and then Max and Caroline are back at square one.

Now, what’s actually pretty commendable about this show is that its episodes have always had fairly [and I say "fairly"] witty titles. Last week’s “And the Extra Work” of course concerned the duo taking up short-term jobs as extras on a show, and “And the Temporary Distraction” involved them finding a little extra money via a temp agency. The cold open fakes us out by having Caroline complain about being tipped with Monopoly money, but it’s hard to believe I didn’t see the reason for the title coming from a mile away. The “tip slip” is Martin Channing’s penis.

Caroline is being melancholy and showing Max pictures of her dad doing good, decent stuff, like being at charity events and water-skiing on rich people lakes. Max zooms in on the latter and sees a little something peeking out of the bottoms of his shorts. Mr. Channing has apparently been blessed in the underpants department.

Jump ahead to Piers Morgan Tonight, where the good people at CBS have indeed brought on Piers Morgan. As far as I can tell the man has no connection to the network or Pier 1 Imports, an assertion Max repeats a handful of times. I’m also somewhat disappointed he is not as funny as Taran Killam’s SNL impression of him. However he did have the excellent line, “Ladies, this is not Maury Povich,” which I really appreciated.

So Sandra talks smack about Mr. Channing while Caroline tries to take the high road and bust her for knowing jack squat about math. All the while Max is sneaking around under the table trying to get Caroline to take her phone with the picture of the member in question. As you may have guessed, the phone makes its way to Morgan, and poor Sandra’s entire story falls apart. The host of show tells her that ”Your book and you lack any credibility,” and that is the end of that.

Oh, and the Current Total goes down! From $1,205 to $940! I had assumed that Sophie was treating them to their massages, but I guess I was wrong.

As you may have guessed, I enjoyed this episode immensely. As I mentioned 7 episodes ago, I do not grade these reviews, but this is another instance where I wish I did. This episode is as good as “And Just Plane Magic” was bad, and has me legitimately excited for the season finale next week. We may not necessarily have any good forward motion right now, but funny is good. I can take humour over narrative for now.

Stray Observations:

  • “Maybe you too can kiss my sweet ass because this outfit’s a home run.”
  • “Well, Han, I would play, but you know, I got this hip thing. Meaning I’m too hip.”
  • Max brings up Caroline’s sleep-farts every day.
  • Vuvuzelas are described as “very 2010,” and this is not inaccurate.
  • Belated whoos for Sophie’s entrance this time around, like they missed their cue or something.
  • “MORE STONES!”
  • 2 Broke Girls Cheesecake Menu: Sandra Rosenthal’s half naked for the entirety of her first scene. As I’ve mentioned, I’m no longer mentioning Sophie in this section.

Shame Day: Nature (The Lack Thereof)

Having come up with the idea to have an entire day based on ruthlessly mocking and shaming something we dislike, I don’t think there’s any question by this point that I’m a relatively cynical person with a bleak outlook on life.

Even so, there are certain things which I am pretty upbeat about.

Not much, mind you, but still enough to for me to get through at least a couple more rounds of “Fame Day.”

Of the handful of things that get my dusty, cobwebbed stamp of approval (certain kinds of noodle soup, most alcoholic beverages, tobacco, satirical cartoons, heavy metal, etc.), there’s one thing especially near-and-dear to me:

Nature.

That might be a bit surprising, but when you take into account that the great outdoors vastly increases the distance between myself and my fellow man, it’ll all fit together. But bitter misanthrope that I am, I really and truly do enjoy nature just as it is. Fresh air, unexplored territory (hiking trails are for wimps), the panoramas- it’s all just, well, liberating. Perhaps the thing I miss most about my college is the fact that on every side of me were rolling hills and tangled forests, as far as the eye could see. At least once a week, I and Evan would be trekking through the woods or sliding across ice floes when the river froze over (mostly, anyways).

(All credit to Evan Yeong)

(All credit to Evan Yeong)

The fact that I enjoy nature so much makes it’s absence all the more palpable- and that is the subject of today’s Shame Day.

Look, chances are, you spend at least eight hours of your time awake cooped up in some office, or serving wealthy snobs, or performing some mind-numbing, back-breaking labor.

The time that you don’t spend there is time you spend getting to and from your place of employment, and time you don’t spend there is used to perform the basic tasks of living. You’re ultimately left with a couple hours in the late evening to use for what little leisure you can afford- chances are, you’re not going to spend them sitting in a park after sundown.

Quite simply, what time you spend in the great outdoors is limited to what little time you have just being outdoors (shopping, commuting, etc.), and with most of us being in some kind of urban environment, there’s precious little in the way of trees, mountains, and amber waves of grain.

Look, I don’t need to tell you that being in nature is healthy for you (barring the people with allergies, but come on). Psychological paper after paper has been published supporting the common sense notion that whittling away your existence in a concrete box isn’t the best thing for the body or soul.

Now while I’d suggest glorious revolution in which the need to create hellish urban centers to maximize production and consumption is done away with…

…I’d be willing to settle for a compromise (for now anyways).

Is it too much to ask for to cut out a swath of any urban area and just let it go? I’m not looking for some quaint, domesticated, neatly trimmed lawns and hedges- I want some actual wilderness that’s accessible to everyone. I’m not unaware that such places would doubtlessly become a haven for stray dogs and meth addicts, but seeing as how we have those anyways, throwing in some native trees and shrubs seems like it’d alleviate the problem at the very least. Or how about some rooftop gardens? Or more slanted building-to-open space ratio when it comes to zoning? At this point, I’d be willing to settle for some more potted plants. And what about kids? We have all these cheesy, preachy PSAs about kids playing outside. Where exactly are they supposed to be? Yeah, running around and climbing trees is good for ya, but where on earth are you supposed to do that- especially in a rougher part of town?

I’m not looking to actually debate the pros and cons of any of those suggestions- they’re really only there to drive the point home that this- this whole concrete jungle thing- sucks. We are not meant to live this way. It’s maddening.

The mountains, the beach, the woods, the lakes- these things shouldn’t be the exclusive pleasures of the wealthy and whatever farmers Monsanto hasn’t yet crushed.

Also, **** Monsanto.

For the sake of our collective sanity and welbeing, can we get this fixed?

What Ever Happened To Comedy?

Comedy.

Everyone likes comedy.

You like comedy. I like comedy. Even the most dour, lifeless people on the planet (Wesleyans) like comedy.

Why then, is it so hard to find a good comedy?

Let me rephrase that- “why is it so hard to find a good comedy movie?

I’m not talking about something that will have you on the floor struggling to breathe, I just mean something that will consistently get a chuckle out of you and not leave you feeling like you’ve wasted two hours of your life.

Seriously- go into a movie store or a library or the “comedy” section of Netflix and what do you have?

Black people doing stuff a hairs breadth away from a minstrel show?

Two hours of C-level actors (and one A level actor whose life has gone terribly wrong) making bad sex jokes?

A couple of stoners doing stupid stuff (even by stoner levels) while SNL actors pop by for cameos?

Let’s face it- even without laughter being their many focus, the genres of action, adventure, sci-fi, and even horror movies still wind up being way funnier than their “comedy” counterparts. Consider John McClane’s stream of sarcastic comments in Die Hard, the back-and-forths in Zombieland, every Pixar movie ever made. These films all easily outstrip their “comedy” counterparts in quantity and quality of humor. Heck, to even make the compete it seems like comedies have to blend themselves with other genres, such as teen-scream satire Tucker & Dale Vs Evil or cop-flick The Other Guys.

The reason for that working is that these spin-off comedies have to actually mirror the movements of the serious films they’re based off of, meaning that they actually have to include a story arc and some degree of characters. Of course, when they don’t, you just get some monstrosity like this:

It’s a pretty straightforward rule. Action movies mean the bad guy has to go down. Horror means the characters have to survive (a couple of ‘em, anyways). Something has to get accomplished by the end- it can’t just be some stand-up routine acted out on screen.

Of course, we also have to address the issue of cheap laughs while we’re at it. I don’t have that much an issue with crass or crude humor. From South Park to Aristophanes’ plays, it’s demonstrated over and over that toilet humor can be nasty and still have some degree of merit. Tragically, 95% of the time it’s simply included because it’s expected to get a “cheap” laugh.

You stay classy, San Diego…

Now I really don’t have any solution to this except to yell “Enough Already”. I could try to point to the tendency of these films to be colossal flops at the box office, but with how little time, effort, and money typically goes into making them, that’s probably going to be about as effective as running a steakhouse in India. Really the only thing I can do here is try to argue that comedies that actually have some effort put into tend to not only be good but iconic. Take a look at Superbad.

Now this is a pretty dang crass movie. It only had a budget of 20 million (not a ton, compared to a lot of other movies). Nevertheless, it had a seriously compelling story and relatable, if not always likeable characters.

Alternatively, Benchwarmers had a budget of 33 million (which just baffles my mind), was not as crude as Superbad, and currently has a rating 11% on Rotten Tomatoes. Why? Because it wasn’t a story. It was a bunch of loosely connected jokes strung out over an hour and a half.

I will never get that time back…

Now I fully recognize that not everything is so black and white. While your comedies which can be emphatically categorized as “good” and “bad”, there’s no small number which fall in between. I’m talking about Napoleon Dynamite

Not everyone likes dry humor

Hot Rod…

Again, this will appeal to a very specific kind of humor…

My favorite film of all time, The Trotsky

You can probably figure out why…

I tried watching Clerks and couldn’t for the life of me figure out what the appeal was supposed to be…

This GIF is pretty funny though…

And you know what? That’s ok. I don’t think something has to be popular to be good.

I rest my case…

In sum total, I think that’s what it comes down to. Comedies seem to be better when they well, don’t try so hard to be comedies. The industry seems to have the process backwards, writing stories to fit jokes rather than jokes to fit stories. That first trailer I showed? I actually think there’s a decent premise in there (buried beneath the hammy acting and tacit racism). If Strange Wilderness (yes I’ve seen it- I still haven’t forgiven myself) wasn’t just a series of potheads messing around, there’d probably be a decent premise under there too. I know that there’s a drive to produce profits, but come on people- you can’t just churn these things out. Again, when one of the most iconic action films in movie history is also substantially funnier than the average comedy, you’ve got some issues.

If that doesn’t serve as a wake-up call, I don’t know what will.

“Asian-Americans,” Admission, and Assimilation

As some of you know, I review the CBS sitcom 2 Broke Girls every Monday night. I do so mostly because The A.V. Club has dropped it from its reviewed shows, and partly because it brings in the hits. This past episode featured the following exchange between Korean diner owner [he's Korean, the diner is not] Han Lee, played by Matthew Moy, and casting director Tom, played by Eddie Shin:

Before you ask, yes, I put the video together myself.

The reason this struck me is that it highlights a humorous turn of events that I’ve observed more than once. As I mentioned in my review, Shin’s character’s response echoes, almost word for word, that of Howling Commando Jim Morita, played by Kenneth Choi in Captain America: The First Avenger:

Yes, I put that clip together as well. Sorry for the out-of-sync sound.

It really got me wondering about why this sort of thing crops up in both television and film. Obviously the purpose is to amuse the audience at one character’s expectations being overturned. The discomfort of finding out that a person who you judged based on their outward appearance was actually not what you once thought.

Now don’t get me wrong, this happens all the time. We’ve all seen, in one form or another, one character’s chagrin at judging another based on first impressions of what they look like. The macho guy bragging to the young lady about firearms and then being soundly outmatched at the shooting range is but one example. The difference here is the common factor of race.

To go further, the common factor of two Asian men revealing that they are, in fact, Asian-American. “Born in the USA,” as that one Bruce Springsteen song goes. In the first case, with Tom, he does not personally identify with being Korean. As it is revealed later on in the episode, he was raised by two White women. Han, the Korean native, continues to press on the common bond he believes they have, but to no avail.

In the second case Jim Morita’s response is to what could be perceived as a veiled threat. Dum Dum Dugan’s question “Are we taking everybody now?” is in reference to the other front in the war being fought in the Pacific. Morita flashing his dogtags reveals that he was likely one of the Nisei, American Born Japanese battalions who fought in the European theatre in World War II. By stating his hometown as Fresno he asserts his identity as an American, and as an ally.

Now, why did this stick out to me so much?

I noticed that neither character ever identifies as being Asian. We can only assume that Tom is Korean, since Han is, and recognizes him as such. Jim Morita is named in Captain America, and we can deduce from his name that he is Japanese. Apart from that, neither man at any points states their ethnic heritage. It would have been quite easy for Tom to say, in an apologetic tone, “Korean, but adopted, sorry, buddy.” The reason I know this is because I’ve done the same sort of thing many times.

As a half-Chinese half-Filipino person I have very often had to explain to others that I do not in fact speak Mandarin, or Cantonese, or whatever other Chinese dialect is being spoken to me. This happens more often than you would think, because I live in East Chinatown. Just this past weekend I was asked by a Chinese woman if I spoke Mandarin, and I had to explain to her that no, I did not, and that I was in fact only half-Chinese.

Notice that I did not state, “I’m from Toronto.” Even though I am Canadian, and even though I identify very little with my Chinese heritage, that blood still flows through my veins. I’m neither ashamed or proud of this, but it is a fact. I am half-Chinese and I identify as such, in addition to other characteristics.

These two men chose to strongly identify themselves as Americans first and foremost. There is nothing wrong with this, and I’m sure  there are tens of thousands if not more who do the same thing every single day. You can be an American, and even a “hyphenated-American,” but what does this mean? Why is it important?

Maybe it’s because of this American idea of comfort. With recent films that appear to be fueled by xenophobia against Asians [Red DawnOlympus Has Fallen] perhaps the idea of an American Asian [an Asian-American] is a soothing thought. The first of the two movies I mentioned includes a US Marine [again played by Kenneth Choi] who tells the protagonists that he’s from San Diego [unfortunately I was unable to cut a particular clip of that line]. Middle Eastern stand-up comedians have made similar jokes about going to airports and easing the fears of those around them by stating that they were from Los Angeles, or whatever other American city would put their minds at ease.

“An Asian who says that he’s from Dunlap, Tennessee, or elsewhere in the United States is surely less of a threat than an immigrant. Their  identifying as an American and speak our language devoid of accent can only be a good thing, and reminds us that the USA is indeed a melting pot.”

Or maybe it says something about cultural assimilation, and the decision to let go of one’s ethnic and cultural heritage in order to become “more American.” This was certainly an issue going as far back as the mid-80s, and I’m not so naive as to think that it doesn’t still happen today. What does it mean to be an Asian-American as opposed to being simply “American”?

Is losing one’s ethnic cultural identity what it takes to seen as truly American? Is referring to an American city the hallmark to letting a person know exactly where you stand? Do Asian-Americans have a reason to do this sort of thing at all?

Maybe I’m just looking into this too much, and chances are that this is the case, but it really does make me think. If Americans are seen as White what does that make Asian-Americans? Are they simply Americans of a different colour, with no other real discernible difference?

Written for you by a[n Asian-] Canadian.

Fame Day: Socialism Conference

I’m writing these words in the last hours of what has been a quiet May Day.

For me, at least.

Elsewhere in the world, red and black flags are being proudly waved as people march through the streets, chanting and singing. In Greece, a nation-wide strike is being carried out in defiance of massive lay-offs enacted by the government. In Bangladesh, thousands are protesting after the collapse of a sweatshop resulted in the death and injury of hundreds of workers. Similar protests have broken out in the Philippines as nearly 10,000 workers march in Manila. Youth in Spain are raging against the nearly 30% unemployment rate. Korea, Cambodia, Turkey, Indonesia- just to name a handful- are witnessing similar turnouts.

In the US, however, the first of May is overwhelmingly just that- the first of the month. Barring a smattering of marches in New York and other cities, the day has gone largely without event. While the majority of the world has some form of working class heroics taking place, America has yet to really see the rise of poor and working class unity. As a great man once said:

I guess that crushing silence makes the few times we do get an alternative to the conservative-liberal slap fight all the sweeter, and there is perhaps nothing more refreshing than the annual Socialism conferences.

Hosted cooperatively by a number of leftist groups (most notably the Center for Economic Research and Social Change and the International Socialist Organization), the Socialism Conference has been held every year since 2009 in Chicago and Oakland, the Mecca and Medina of the American Left.

It is well nigh impossible to find Marxism gifs…

Now you might be thinking, “Okay, commi, you might get all hyped up about the overthrow of the bourgeois taskmasters and the establishment of a truly free and democratic society, but why should we care?”

This is why.

There really isn’t, in this country, any solid alternative perspective to the views of Republicans (who believe in Capitalism with some minor restrictions) and Democrats (who believe in Capitalism with some minor restrictions). For all the hissy-fits thrown by Limbaugh and Maher, there’s not a whole lot of real difference between ‘em. Heck, a person could go to sleep in 2003 and wake up today and not have any reason to assume Bush wasn’t still president. The so-called “third” parties are simply extensions of the big two. Greens don’t fundamentally differ from Democrats, and all but the most hardcore Libertarians (though this is changing a bit) will vote Republican after Ron Paul loses for the seventieth time.

As fun as this may have been…

Simply for the fact that a truly alternate perspective is being offered is reason in and of itself to take interest. What really hits it home though, is that Socialism conferences aren’t just dissent- they’re good dissent.

We’re talking about a host of topics offered not from starchy professors and oily economic consultants, but rather from a diverse array of individuals, ranging from teachers to activists, to writers (novelists and journalists alike), veterans, holocaust survivors, union organizers, prisoners, and musicians.

You’re going to be able to hear discussions of issues you’d never see tackled elsewhere. Scheduled for the 2013 conference is a session on the Asian-American community. Up as well is a talk on the rise of “Juan Crow” laws. There’s going to be Native American history. Courses on how to perform activism in your community.

Education reform.

World history.

“Leninism vs. Zinovienism.”

I have no clue what that last one is, but it sounds interesting.

And we’re not just talking about audios of the lectures (open to the public on their website- check it out), but videos as well. You can see the testimonies of the families of young black men killed by the police- if those don’t stir you, I don’t know what will.

Of course, all of that’s possible through the simple high-quality of everything they’re offering. You don’t have to scan through some manifesto on an html page in the dark recesses of the internet- everything you need is laid out, well, professionally. Format, as Evan will be quick to tell you, makes or breaks a message. Fortunately, the Socialism conference’s materials are unimpeachably well-done.

So what are you waiting for? Head on over and check out a few lectures. Watch a few videos. Expand your horizons a bit.

Who knows? Maybe enough people doing it will mean next May Day won’t be so quiet.

I also really, really could use some leftist gifs…

Evan and Gordon Talk: Indie Games [And Minecraft]

EVAN: Two weeks ago our good friend Stew said:

You should write about indie game development and how it’s changing the industry.

And so, after avoiding the topic for a little while, here we are.

GORDON: For the sake of any readers who might not be familiar with what an “indie game” is, while definitions vary, the general consensus is that an “indie game” is any video game developed outside of the major/mainstream video game industry (sometimes called “Triple A”).

EVAN: A pretty good example of this would be Braid. A more well-known example that you’ve probably at least heard about [and that both Gordon and I have played a decent amount of] is Minecraft.

GORDON: Ah, Minecraft. You never forget the first time you play it, and you never truly can grow tired of it.

I guess to jump into Stew’s request, I’m seeing the industry changed in two major ways:

Firstly, it’s demonstrative that creating video games is becoming- how do I say this- less intricate? Certainly our growing digital literacy is making the ability to produce video games (heck, ALL programs) far more easy. It definitely goes to show that it’s creativity, not money, that makes a good game

Secondly, I believe Minecraft in particular exemplifies a positive trend in video game development

EVAN: I don’t know if “intricate” is quite the right word, exactly, since quite a few indie games have proven to be extremely complex, though perhaps a little lower in quality when it comes to graphics.

That being said, one of the reasons I believe that Minecraft in particular has thrived so much is community involvement, the only other game that I believe matches it in this regard being Team Fortress 2.

GORDON: I’m familiar with the background behind Minecraft- perhaps you could speak a bit about TF2?

EVAN: A lot of those nifty custom weapons [dragon-mouthed miniguns, nail-studded bats, etc.] were actually modeled by the community, and taken by Steam to be implemented into the game. This is true of a lot of aesthetic add-ons as well.

GORDON: THAT, right there is something we probably wouldn’t being seeing without Indie Games.

Open development (in one way or another). People have been modding games for ages, but actually working these ideas into games? I don’t think any major studio would’ve done that.

EVAN: I think it’s pretty fair to say that Steam is a major studio, though. Their Dota 2 tournaments have prize money in the tens of thousands of dollars.

GORDON: I was under the impression that Steam was more of an umbrella company over a loose confederation of smaller studios

EVAN: Oh, sorry, I meant Valve.

GORDON: But one way or another, the rise of indie games certainly have accelerated the growth of popularity of “open source” games, even if they didn’t invent it.

EVAN: Our readers don’t know this, but Gordon and I talk back and forth between our “actual” conversation, and we just agreed that this prompt is proving fairly difficult to create decent discourse about.

Therefore I suggest that we change the topic to Minecraft in general.

GORDON: Much agreed. And let me start by saying this: hardcore mode, people, it changes everything

EVAN: A little context for our readers? Really, a lot of context, since we’re shifting gears here

GORDON: ”Hardcore mode” is an option you can turn on before you spawn in a sprawling world. While if you die in Minecraft you can typically respawn, hardcore mode gives you only one life and ratchets up the difficulty in a world where pretty much everything is trying to kill you.

EVAN: And Gordon has played it more times than any man should. But to veer away from his remarkable tenacity, let’s focus on how much the game has grown and expanded since its inception.

GORDON: Where to even begin?

Back in the game’s infancy, you spawned in a single latitude. If you found yourself in a winter wonderland, that’s all there was. It was a simple game of mining resources and fending off monstrous hordes that would attack you at night.

EVAN: Now there are several regions, each with their own climate and unique number of resources and oh my, the list really does go on. The very number of different resources has increased exponentially, as well as the items you can craft out of them.

GORDON: You can freaking teleport to different dimensions.

EVAN: There are witches who throw vials of potion at you.

GORDON: You can slay dragons.

And with a mere slice of the past covered, why don’t we talk a bit about what we’d like to see in Minecraft in the future? In the spirit of the subject of our discussion.

EVAN: Well, you’re certainly going to have to let me know what is in and what isn’t, since I haven’t played on nigh over a year, but allow me to suggest: more aquatic animals/creatures.

GORDON: I really couldn’t agree more. Water makes up what? 80% of any given Minecraft world (that’s a totally baseless percentage) and really is JUST water. And squids.

How about some whales? You could get oil from ‘em and make superbright lamps.

EVAN: Heck, actual schools of fish that you could aim for with your fishing rod couldn’t be that hard to implement.

GORDON: Coral would be fun, even if just for decorative purposes, and sponge, which exists in creative mode, should finally be brought in. Not sure for what, but hey- we’ll find something.

Can we also get sheep to finally give us mutton in addition to wool? It makes no sense that you can starve to death on an island full of sheep.

EVAN: Gordon, you can’t eat sheep. Every sane person knows that to consume their flesh involves a very complicated process to drain every drop of their poisonous blood.

GORDON: Heh.

Here’s a big thing I’ve been wanting for a while now: a new monster.

EVAN: Whoa, I thought witches were post-Endermen.

GORDON: Witches did come after Endermen, but they’re rarer than diamonds.

See, readers, every once in a long while a new monster or “mob” is added. The last major one was the “Enderman” who, despite looking freaky, is about as dangerous as the chickens in the game.

What I want is this: a vampire.

Only appears during a new moon (yes, the moon goes through cycles), and he looks JUST like you. Which in a game where you pretty much inhabit an empty world is downright freaky.

EVAN: So what would they do, exactly? Besides scaring the bejeezus out of people.

GORDON: They actively hunt you down. Most mobs are territorial, and only attack you if you get too close. Not these guys, though.

EVAN: On the note of new mobs, I’d like villages of Pigmen, or something. Actual huts and things with crude farms and these aggressive villagers who just want to go about eating their melons or whatever and hate being bothered.

GORDON: That would be cool. And play into my theory that the nether isn’t a different dimension, but rather a terrifying image of things yet to come.

Fruit trees would be fun.

EVAN: How have fruit trees not been implemented yet?!

GORDON: You can legitimately expect fruit trees to be fun.

Well, apples drop randomly from oak trees, but as of yet there’s no way of creating orchards or anything like that. How about animals changing shape depending on which biome they’re in?

Cows spawned in the cold are yaks. Sheep in the desert are goats.

EVAN: I would love to see really big animals, like elephants or mammoths, that you’d have to really work to hunt down. Really play up the multiplayer aspect of things.

GORDON: That would be awesome.

Different colored stone would be a nice change.

EVAN: So that you could finally recreate Redwall Abbey in Minecraft without having to resort to freakin’ dyed wool.

GORDON: That freaking wool.

EVAN: Context for the under-informed?

GORDON: Stone is pretty much only grey in Minecraft. People resort to blocks of dyed wool to change things up.

EVAN: That’s right. For lack of a way to paint stone or wood, people are building immense structures out of the resource you can gather by punching sheep.

GORDON: You’d think they would’ve changed that by now.

EVAN: Okay, one last suggestion from each of us, and let’s make it good.

GORDON: I know it’s been theorized, but flight. I want to have the ability to create a flying machine.

EVAN: Considering there are flying dragons, I see that as not being out of the question.

My final suggestion is firearms, or at least more uses for gunpowder. Creating a cannon out of iron and firing cannonballs would be amazing. I’d really be content with any kind of siege weapon.

GORDON: That would be cool.

EVAN: In talking about the creative potential of a single game, Minecraft, we’ve discussed but a single facet of what makes indie games so awesome.

The fact that Mojang is so open to suggestions and implementing changes means that Minecraft will continue to grow and evolve long after Skyrim makes way for whatever Elder Scrolls game is next.

Indie games and the studios that create them are doing wonders for the industry, and it’s the way that they’re able to make decisions free of large corporations and they’re need to stick to a conventional format that makes them the way they are.

GORDON: Now once again, the comment section is open for your suggestions, requests, and angry, tearful demands.

EVAN: Do we actually have any more comments to follow-up, on? I think this may have been our last.

GORDON: It was. Hence the need for more. Or once again, we will be super passive-aggressive about it.

EVAN: Actually, I think Joe had a comment about the current state of the church.

GORDON: Well then, we’ll just generate some options for ourselves. People- you are now in competition with Joe. Let’s see what you got.