Josh White

Joshua Daniel White is gebore in Greenville, Suid-Carolina, in 1914. As kind het hy as gids vir 'n plaaslike straatsanger, Blind John Henry Arnold, gewerk. In 1932 verhuis White na New York, waar hy 'n opnamekontrak met ARC verkry en 'n groot sukses behaal met liedjies soos St. James Infirmary Blues en die anti-lynch-liedjie, Vreemde vrugte.

In 1939 verskyn White saam met Paul Robeson in die vertoning John Henry. Tydens die Tweede Wêreldoorlog tree hy op vir die US Office of War Information. Hierdie radioprogramme is deur die BBC uitgesaai en hy het baie gewild geword in Brittanje.

Na die oorlog het die House of Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) 'n ondersoek na die vermaaklikheidsbedryf begin. In die eerste drie jaar het die HUAC daarin geslaag om 'n groot aantal mense op die swartlys te kry vir hul politieke sienings. Op 22 Junie 1950 publiseer Theodore Kirkpatrick, 'n voormalige FBI-agent en Vincent Harnett, 'n regse televisieprodusent, Rooi kanale, 'n pamflet met die name van 151 skrywers, regisseurs en kunstenaars wat volgens hulle lede was van ondermynende organisasies voor die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, maar tot dusver nog nie op die swartlys was nie.

White was een van die name in Rooi kanale. Dit het 'n ernstige probleem geword toe 'n gratis kopie gestuur is aan diegene wat betrokke was by die aanstelling van mense in die vermaaklikheidsbedryf. Al die mense wat in die pamflet genoem word, was op die swartlys totdat hulle voor die House of Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) verskyn en sy lede oortuig het dat hulle hul radikale verlede heeltemal verloën het.

Op 1 September 1950 verskyn White voor die HUAC. Hy het erken dat hy by liefdadigheidskonserte saam met Paul Robeson opgetree het, maar het aangevoer dat hy nie bewus was van die politieke groepe agter hulle nie. White beweer dat die enigste kommunis wat hy geken het, Robeson se vriend, Benjamin Davis, was.

Ondanks hierdie getuienis is White egter nie van die swartlys in die Verenigde State verwyder nie. White het sy loopbaan as volksanger in Europa voortgesit, waar sy werk deur Vogue (Frankryk) en EMI (Brittanje) gepubliseer is. White het ook vir Electra (1954-62) en Mercury (1962-4) opgeneem. Josh White is op 5 September 1969 oorlede.

Ek was sewe jaar oud toe ek my huis in Greenville, Suid -Carolina, verlaat om 'n blinde man te lei terwyl ek die tamboeryn speel. Voordat ek agt jaar oud was, het ek geweet wat dit beteken om geskop en mishandel te word. Voordat ek nege jaar oud was, het ek twee lynchings gesien. Ek moet Jim Crow haat vir wat dit persoonlik aan my gedoen het en omdat Jim Crow 'n belediging is vir God se skepsels en 'n skending van die Christelike oortuigings wat my pa geleer het.

Ek het 'n groot bewondering vir meneer Robeson as akteur en groot sanger, en as dit waar is wat ek in die koerante lees, is ek hartseer oor die hulp wat hy gegee het aan mense wat Amerika minag. Hy het die reg op sy eie opinies, maar as hy of iemand voorgee dat hy vir die hele wedloop praat, maak hy 'n grap.

Ek is van plan om vir my eie onthalwe te verduidelik, en ter wille van baie ander entertainers wat, net soos ek, gebruik en uitgebuit is deur mense wat trou aan 'n vreemde mag gee.

Ek het uitgevind dat hy Robeson die vorige aand gebel het en gesê: "Paul, ek moet net laat weet dat ek môre 'n hakskeen van myself moet maak."

'Wel, waarom moet jy?' Het Robeson gesê.

"Ek kan jou nie sê hoekom nie, maar ek moet net, ek het geen keuse nie."

Van Josh Rooi kanale inskrywing was tipies. Dit beskryf hom as 'n "sanger van volksliedere" en berig dat hy op die Advisory Committee of People's Songs verskyn het en as 'n entertainer of kunstenaar vir tien verdagte organisasies, wat wissel van die Kommunistiese Party tot die New Theatre League, American Relief. vir die Griekse demokrasie en die veterane teen diskriminasie van burgerregte -kongres. Al die aanbiedings was minstens drie jaar oud, en die meeste is eenvoudig uit die kopie geneem Daaglikse werker advertensies en konsertresensies.

"Ek het so vinnig as moontlik hier gekom." Ek sê: 'Eerstens weet ek nie waar u die leuen vandaan kom nie, 'n leuen wat ek in Europa voor die Kommunistiese Party gehou het. Ek gee minder om vir die Kommunistiese Party. Ek is 'n Amerikaner, ek is hier gebore. Maar in die eerste plek, laat ek jou van myself vertel. ' En ek het begin vandat ek 'n kind was. oor die vrees wat die gemiddelde neger vir die uniform het, die koperknoppies, die brutaliteit. Die Suide - ek kan jou nie eers vertel nie. Dit is moeilik om te dink hoe dit was. Ek het hom vertel van die lynchings, van die belasting, ek het hom van my pa vertel, ek het hom die bleddie ding vertel.

"En dan sê hy vir my: 'U het 'n hele paar jaar by Cafe Society gewerk. U weet dat dit deur die Kommunistiese Party bestuur is.' En ek sê: 'Nee, ek doen dit nie. Barney Josephson en vra hom wat sy verhoudings is, of wat sy gevoelens was. U moet nie u baas vra nie. Nee, u doen dit nie.


Merk: Geskiedenis

Beste Joe Corré,

Ek lees met kommer dat u van plan is om al u punk -memorabilia op 'n vuur te gooi. En ek wou skryf om beleefd aan u te vra of u dit vreeslik sou omgee, weet u nie. Asseblief.

Sien, u glo miskien dat punk deur die Britse establishment gekoöpteer en geabsorbeer is. En u dink miskien dat Punk London, die program van geleenthede en uitstallings wat deur die Nasionale Lotery gefinansier word, 'n poging is om van punk 'n museumstuk of 'n huldeblyk te maak. Eintlik het jy dit gesê. Jy het gesê: Punk het soos 'n fokken museumstuk of 'n huldeblyk geword. ” Jy het dit nou die dag gesê Die voog. Ek het dit gelees.

Wel, dit is reeds 'n huldeblyk. U kyk na iemand wat tydens pop-punk grootgeword het. (Ek het wettiglik gehou van Blink-182 en ek het na hul optredes gegaan en alles. Ja, ek weet. Gril.) Dit is ook 'n museumstuk. Heelwat punkgoed is reeds in museums. Soos hierdie trui wat ontwerp is deur u ouers, Vivienne Westwood en Malcolm McLaren. Dit is verkoop in 1976. Dit is al 22 jaar in die Victoria & amp Albert Museum se versameling. U onthou waarskynlik die V & ampA van toe hulle die ryk suksesvolle uitstalling van u ma se werk met al haar punk -klere en nog baie meer gedoen het. Hulle het dit 12 jaar gelede gedoen.

Punk London gaan nie net om mense uit die middelklas te laat gons na punk nie. Net omdat u dink dat punk deur die onderneming herwin word om sy eie doel te bereik, beteken dit nie dat punk nie in museums hoort nie, en ook nie dat die kulturele erfenis daarvan onderhewig moet wees aan die soort kritiese ondersoek wat moontlik gemaak word deur museums, of historici. Punk het 'n geskiedenis, gebaseer op die geskiedenis van ons samelewing en kultuur, en dit is reg dat hierdie geskiedenis verstaan ​​en ontleed word. Dit help ons om te leer wie ons is. Ons is die punkers, ons is die mense. Toon die (hoogs debatteerbare) siening dat niks soos die Sex Pistols voor of sedert bestaan ​​bestaan ​​het dat punk 'n verskynsel was wat homself uit die kulturele geskiedenis of uit die tyd gebreek het nie? Natuurlik doen dit nie.

U sien, namens historici oral, maak dit ons regtig ontsteld as mense ons bronne vernietig. Ons fokken liefde bronne. God, hoe doen ons. Ons hou daarvan om hulle aan te raak, te lees, na hulle te kyk. Maar bowenal, en dit is waar ons regtig geil raak, en ons hou daarvan om die bronne te evalueer in 'n poging om veronderstelde magsverhale uit die verlede uit te haal en sodoende ons gesamentlike sosiale begrip en ons herinneringe aan wie ons is. Ons is wild. Ons ondersoek die verhale van die rykes, kritiseer die leuens van die magtiges, bemagtig die stemloses. EN DIT SLEGS OP DIE GESKIEDENISKANAAL. Wat is meer punk as om 'n historikus te wees? Absoluut niks. Eerlik aan God, ons is wonderlik.

Maar ons kan nie al die cool kak doen as u ons bronne vernietig nie. Ons het goed nodig. Nou, daar is 'n veld van historiese ondersoek wat tegnieke van antropoloë leen om die verlede te bestudeer via die voorwerpe, dinge en dinge wat mense gemaak, gebruik en besit het, en mense het deur hierdie dinge kulturele uitdrukking gemaak. Stop my as jy dit weet. Hierdie goed, hierdie “materiaal kultuur ”, is goed. Hierdie benadering is nie net 'n betreklik nuwe subdissipline van die geskiedenis nie (ongeveer 20 jaar oud, wat in historiese opsigte in die mode is), maar hierdie benadering bied ook opwindende maniere om die verlede te bestudeer wat voorheen nie vir historici beskikbaar was nie. In plaas daarvan om net punk te bestudeer deur byvoorbeeld hedendaagse koerante, TV -dekking of fotografie, kan ons nadink oor die dinge wat die sleutel was tot punk en hul geskiedenis, hul biografieë toelig.

Neem byvoorbeeld die deurhandvatsel wat u het, die een van die voordeur na Sex, McLaren en Westwood se winkel op die King's Road. Dit is 'n vanselfsprekende waardevolle (ek praat nie £ £ £ nie) stuk punk-memorabilia. Dit is 'n koel AF. Dit vertel ons ook iets oor seks wat ons nie uit foto's kan leer nie. Ons kan byvoorbeeld voel hoe swaar die handvatsel is. U het gesê dit is 'n metaal sakdoek met 'n pienk emalje -logo met die opskrif ‘Sex 430 ’. Ek sou raai dat 'n metaal sakdoek nie noodwendig 'n baie praktiese instrument is om deure oop te maak nie. Die gewig daarvan, die vorm, die grootte en hierdie dinge vertel ons iets oor hoe Westwood en McLaren ons wou hê dat ons by die winkel sou ingaan. Dit kan ons ook iets vertel oor die prosesse wat dit gemaak het. Waar kom die metaal vandaan? Wie het dit gemaak? Hoeveel is hulle betaal? Hoe oud was hulle? Was hulle professioneel vaardig of 'n gewillige amateur? Hierdie vrae help ons om onder meer die sosiale, ekonomiese en politieke samestelling van Brittanje in die laat 1970's en 1980's te verstaan. Hierdie vrae help ons om die verhale van die magtiges uit te daag wat voorgee dat mense soos hierdie nie saak maak nie, dat die geskiedenis van klas, verskil, protes en verset voetnote is in die Oxford English Biography of Civilized Progress. Daardie dinge is noodsaaklik. Die kak is dom. Dit is ons geskiedenis en dit behoort aan ons almal.

Die handvatsel hoort dus in 'n museum. Nou is museums polities neutraal. Natuurlik is hulle nie#8217t nie. Uitstallings en versamelings is dikwels uitdrukkings van mag van verskillende regerende groepe en ideologieë. Byvoorbeeld, die British Museum se komende ‘Sunken Cities ’ uitstalling oor ou Egiptiese stede wat onder water verlore geraak het, sal waarskynlik 'n redelike deel van die verlede uit Egipte insluit wat as karnaval aangebied word vir die wit, westelike blik. Sommige van Punk London se gebeurtenisse is inderdaad skaars vermomde en neerbuigende vermanings oor die werkersklas-kultuur. 'N vinnige blik op die lys van gebeure sal wys op … hang op. Wat is u hier! Jou brandende ding! Dit is hier op 26 November. Gelys as “Joe Corré brand sy punkgoed ”. Jy het nooit gesê nie!

Wel, wat nou? Dit het my punt net bewys. Nou is u deel van hierdie huldeblyk-museum-stuk wat u wou vermy. Dit is amper asof jy deel is van die skouspel. Miskien toon dit dat die betekenis van punk baie ingewikkelder en kragtiger is as wat u voorstel. Punk is nie 'n slagoffer van kapitalisme nie; dit het kapitalisme nodig. Die praktyke daarvan volg die mees basiese voorbeelde van kapitalistiese ondernemings. Produseer, bemark, ruil, belê. Verkoop plate, maak klere, versprei die boodskap. Soos jy sê, was die manipuleerders nog nie gemanipuleer deur die prosesse van kapitalisme vir kommersiële gewin nie, maar hulle was hartlik betrokke by hul eie kommersiële manipulasies.

Westwood en McLaren was immers handelaars. Hulle bemark punk, plaas 'n strepieskode daarop en verkoop dit aan kinders op die Kings Road voordat iemand die eerste G-akkoord van Anargie in die Verenigde Koninkryk . En hulle het dit nogal goed gedoen. So ook jy. Erflike rykdom, terloops, of dit nou kontant is of bates wat in punk -memorabilia vasgemaak is, is redelik naby aan die definisie van “establishment ”. (Ag, om 48 en wit en manlik en ryk en punk te wees!) Boonop was verkoop altyd deel van punk. Dit was nog altyd ephemera. Dit was nog altyd vuilgoed wat weggegooi is. Dit was die punt. Het dit nie altyd gegaan om die spieël van betekenislose agteruitgang van kapitalisme, van die gruwelike onwerklikheid van sy neerdrukkende skouspel, om die lewensbevestigende waarheid te beklemtoon dat ons almal siek geword het onder die moderne wêreld se vervreemdings?

U het dus tereg vasgestel dat die geldwaarde van u memorabilia 'n verdraaide manier is om die belangrikheid daarvan te verstaan. Jy het ook reg, ons moet al die kak weer ontplof. ” Maar asseblief, moet asseblief nie. Sit namens historici oral die petrolblik neer. Trek die vlammende skip af.

Om hierdie goed aan 'n museum te gee, is moontlik die punkste ding wat jy daarmee kan doen. U kan help om die verhale van die kragtige verhale uit te daag wat voorgee dat die mense wat hierdie dinge geskep en aanbid het nie saak maak nie, dat die geskiedenis van verskil, protes en verset geen waarde het nie.

Sodoende bied u mense hul eie geskiedenis. Hulle eie, vir hulle om te eis, as hulle dit wil hê. Toekoms, geen toekoms nie. Wat ook al.


Die volksanger Josh White lees die lirieke van 'Strange Fruit' in die kongresrekord

Die volksanger Josh White, wat op hierdie dag opgeroep is om te getuig vir die House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), het die tafel op die komitee gedraai deur die lirieke van Vreemde vrugte, 'n skerp aanklag van lynch wat beroemd is deur Billie Holiday.

Josh White was 'n bekende Afro-Amerikaanse blues- en volksanger wat ook uitgesproke was oor burgerregte en ander sosiale kwessies. Op 22 Junie 1950 word hy in die berugte verslag genoem Rooi kanale as 'n kommunistiese simpatiseerder. As gevolg hiervan is hy voor die House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) ontbied om op hierdie dag te getuig. White het nie teruggekeer van sy politieke verpligtinge deur sy steun vir burgerregte te bevestig nie en die hele lirieke van die beroemde Billie Holiday -liedjie te lees, Vreemde vrugte, in die Kongresrekord. (Sien 20 April 1939 vir die oorspronklike opname van Holiday van die beroemde anti-lynch-liedjie.)

Vroeër in sy loopbaan is White in Februarie 1941 deur Eleanor Roosevelt uitgenooi om in die Withuis te sing, wat beskryf word as 'n "kommando-uitvoering", en word die eerste Afro-Amerikaner wat ooit in die Withuis opgetree het. Hy speel ook tydens die derde inhuldiging van president Roosevelt in 1941. En op 31 Januarie 1963 tree hy op by "Dinner with the President", 'n geleentheid ter ere van president John F. Kennedy wat deur 'n CBS -televisie aan 'n nasionale gehoor aangebied is.


Waarom 'n geskiedenis van punk rock?

Punkrock, miskien meer as enige genre in die geskiedenis van populêre musiek, is byna ondeurdringbaar verstrengel in ideologieë.

Wat begin het as 'n artistieke beweging, as 'n uitdrukking van teenkulturele angs, het kontinente oorgesteek in filmstudio's, letterkunde, poësie, teaters, kunsgalerye en loopplate. Teen die middel van die negentigerjare was punk 'n wêreldwye handelsware. Green Day, Blink-182 en My Chemical Romance is nou huishoudelike name. Punk, die bratterige, snotneus-opkomende ras van rock en roll, gebou op anti-musikaliteit, gebou op die verwerping van stadionrock, gebou op 'n smalende ontkenning van tegniese vaardigheid, gebou-van kardinale belang-op die uiteensetting van die performer-gehoor verhouding, op die aanval teen die musikale hoofstroom - punk het nou vierkantig in die hoofstroom aangekom.

Tog bly die geskiedenis van punk ongeskrewe. Mondelinge geskiedenis, biografieë, fanzines en kritiese studies het probeer om die betekenis van 'punk' te kodifiseer, en het op baie maniere waardevolle navorsing gebied oor die gewildheid van punk, sy taal, vorme, assosiasies en bewegings, die ekonomieë, die sosiale samestelling daarvan, die rolle van vroue en etniese minderhede en die invloed daarvan op buitestaanders, insluitend die persepsie van die media en kritiese resepsie.

Maar baie min pogings is aangewend om die oorsprong van die idees aan die wortel van punkrock op te spoor, om die intellektuele kultuur of die sosiale en ekonomiese druk wat hierdie nuuskierige en boeiende sak filosofieë gevorm het, te verstaan. Van Schopenhaueriaanse nihilisme tot Nietzsche se Dionysiaanse waarde van kuns, van die visuele poësie van Ginsberg tot die hedonisme van Kerouac, die filosofie van punk kan uit die woorde van die voorvaders van punk self, uit die mond van Joey Ramone, Lou Reed, geterg word Patti Smith, Iggy Pop en Andy Warhol. Punk het begin as 'n stel idees wat deur kragakkoorde, vervorming en drummende tromme aangevoer, geskreeu en geblaas is.

Hierdie buitengewone kultuur het in Amerika grootgeword. Historici van punk, alhoewel hulle baie min is, het tot dusver voorgestel dat punk as 'n herkenbare vorm van rock and roll - met 'n duidelike stel idees - in Brittanje begin of tot stand gekom het. Tricia Henry, wie se Breek alle reëls! Punk Rock en die maak van 'n styl (1989) is 'n klein aantal wetenskaplike ondersoeke na punkrock, en beweer dat punk in sy vorm voordat The Sex Pistols in 1976 in Brittanje aangekom het, eerder 'n soort 'ondergrondse rock' was wat net die 'punk' geword het wat ons kan identifiseer nou met die invloed van Malcolm McLaren en Vivienne Westwood op die orkes en die politisering van die musiek.

In Amerika, beweer sy, het die "ondergrondse rockbeweging hoofsaaklik bestaan ​​uit middelklas-jeugdiges wat middelklaswaardes verwerp. In Brittanje verteenwoordig punk oor die algemeen werkersklas-jongmense wat op die burgerlike status quo reageer." In die atmosfeer van werkloosheid in Brittanje, "toe die Engelse [sic] blootgestel is aan die deurslaggewende punk-rock-invloede van die New York-toneel, het die ironie, pessimisme en amateurstyl van die musiek openlike sosiale en politieke implikasies gekry, en Britse punk het net so selfbewustelik proletêr geword as esteties. "

Die aanname dat punk se aard op een of ander manier polities is, is ahistories. Die einste term 'punk' het wortels in 'n Amerikaanse uitgeworpene kultuur, as 'n pejoratiewe woord wat gebruik word om 'n asosiale tak van die stedelike samelewing te beskryf, wat Henry noem "the hoodlum, the nutteless element in society", lank voor 1977. Trouens , die beelde en idees van punk is baie meer verskuldig aan apolitieke kulturele memes soos Marlon Brando se Johnny Strabler in Die Wilde Een (1953) as vir marxisme, omgewingsbewustheid of anti-republikeinse burgerlike ongehoorsaamheid.

Soos Henry toon, het die New Yorkse "underground rock" -toneel die Britse punk en die latere, skerper ideologiese onderafdelings soos hardcore en Oi! wat in die 1980's gestalte gekry het. En daar is geen twyfel dat baie van hierdie musiek baie polities was nie. Maar voor 1977, voor die ontploffing van wat Henry 'punk' noem, was kunstenaars soos die Velvet Underground, die Ramones, Iggy en die Stooges, die New York Dolls, die MC5, Patti Smith en meer self geïdentifiseer as punkers as deel van 'n nuwe musikale beweging genaamd punk rock. As ons sê dat punk eers in 1976 punk was, wie was hierdie 'punks' in New York? Wat het hulle geglo punk is, en waarom was dit belangrik? Hierdie geskiedenis moet nog geskryf word. Die geskiedenis van punk as 'n dialoog, 'n bepaalde dialek en 'n beweging van idees kan slegs met 'n nuwe, kulturele geskiedenis verstaan ​​word.

'N Kulturele en intellektuele geskiedenis van punk moet in New York begin, met die intellektuele kultuur van die punk -toneel. By CBGB's in Bowery, New York, het eienaar Hilly Kristal en ander die dansvloer, verhoog en mikrofoon verskaf vir honderde ongetekende orkeste en duisende ontevrede jeugdiges in een van die mees vervloekte gebiede van die stad. Tussen 1973 en 1977, in die beginjare van Amerikaanse punk - aan die begin van punk self - het 'n ontwikkelde, gesofistikeerde en dinamiese kultuur gegroei binne die sweterige mure van CBGB's, nou een van die mees ikoniese rock -terreine ter wêreld.

Hierdie kultuur het 'n versameling idees in sy middel gehad. Nihilisties, pessimisties, anti-outoritêr en anargisties in sy burgerlike en politieke boodskap uitlokkend, Dada-esque en teatraal in sy artistieke uitdrukking hedonisties, eksperimenteel en egalitêr in sy sosiale waardes-CBGB's was die spilpunt van hierdie idees, idees wat nie nuut was nie, maar algemeen in die jeugkultuur van die sewentigerjare, idees wat 'n eienaardige weerklank vind in die groeiende geskiedskrywing van die laaste kwart van die twintigste eeu. Identiteite, sommige gesmee in geslag, ras en klas, afgebakende kulturele ruimtes, die ontbinding van die holistiese ideale van 'n 'samelewing', het bygedra tot 'n groeiende skeiding van die sosiale weefsel in self-identifiserende 'groepe', met triomfantelike bewegings vir eie regte, magte en kulture. Punk pas in 'n groot mate in hierdie geskiedenis: jong, stedelike, Amerikaanse punks was nie grootliks bekommerd oor waar hulle in die samelewing sou kon inkom nie, maar was oorweldigend belê in hierdie proses van identifisering, skeiding en fragmentasie.

Boonop moet 'n geskiedenis van die genre die woorde en idees van punk uit punkers self oorweeg, uit die mondelinge verslae en fanzines, onderhoude en kontemporêre biografieë. Hierdie musikale beweging kan nie net gesien word as 'n radikale vertrek binne rock and roll nie, want dit waardeer die impak daarvan. Historici moet gewilde musiek begin plaas in die middelpunt van kulturele geskiedenis, in die oond van kulturele skepping. Hierdie navorsing moet poog om by te dra tot die verstaan ​​van musiek dat dit, net soos film, kuns of dans, net so 'n waardevolle medium vir historiese studie is as alle ander kunsvorme. Punk toon as voorbeeld dat musiek net so artistiek soos idees soos film of kuns uiting kan gee, en by implikasie dat populêre musiekgeskiedenis net so waardevol kan wees vir ons begrip van ons kulturele verlede as die geskiedenis van film of die geskiedenis van kuns.

Hierdie navorsing moet fokus op die primêre verslae van musikante, promotors, vervaardigers, bestuurders, roadies, groupies, resensente en die stemme van die tyd om te beklemtoon dat musiek idees op unieke maniere kan dra en transformeer en byvoorbeeld kan resoneer op maniere wat die bioskoop of televisie kan nie kulture om homself bou nie as gevolg van sy eie krag en magnetisme as kunsvorm.


Verwante inhoud

Dit is 'n plek vir menings, kommentaar, vrae en besprekings, 'n plek waar kykers van History Detectives hul standpunte kan uitspreek en kontak kan maak met ander wat die geskiedenis waardeer. Ons vra dat plakkate beleefd en respekvol moet wees vir alle menings. History Detectives behou die reg voor om kommentaar te verwyder wat nie aan hierdie gedrag voldoen nie. Ons sal nie op elke pos reageer nie, maar ons sal ons bes doen om spesifieke vrae te beantwoord of 'n fout op te los.

  • Blaai volgens seisoen
    • Seisoen 11
    • Seisoen 10
    • Seisoen 9
    • Seisoen 8
    • Seisoen 7
    • Seisoen 6
    • Seisoen 5
    • Seisoen 4
    • Seisoen 3
    • Seisoen 2
    • Seisoen 1

    Ondersteun u plaaslike PBS -stasie: skenk nou

    Gebruiksvoorwaardes | Privaatheidsbeleid | & kopie 2003 - 2014 Oregon Public Broadcasting. Alle regte voorbehou.


    Burgerregte in lied (5): die politiek van die volksherlewing en die verhaal van Josh White

    Die dag toe Martin Luther King by die Lincoln -gedenkteken staan ​​en van sy droom praat, sien ons ook 'n paar van die groot ligte van die volksmusiektoneel van die dag. Onder die optredes was iemand waarvan die meeste mense waarskynlik gehoor het: Bob Dylan. Ek vermoed dat baie min van Josh White gehoor het. Maar die White ’s -verhaal, en die verhaal van die Amerikaanse herlewing in Amerika, gee ons 'n stukkie Amerikaanse sosiale, politieke en kulturele geskiedenis. Dit neem ons van die stofbak na New York, van die Withuis na die HUAC.

    Die belangstelling in die tradisionele musiek van Europa en Amerika was skaars nuut. In die later deel van die 19de eeu was James Francis Child 'n akademikus van Harvard: hy het byvoorbeeld een van die belangrikste studies oor Chaucer geskryf. Waarvoor hy miskien die beste onthou word, is sy versameling 305 tradisionele Engelse en Skotse volksliedere, in die volksmond bekend as Kinderballades. Hulle word vandag nog gesing (dit is soms bekend dat ek my hand na nommer 102 draai, die ongelooflike mooi Willie O Winsbury).

    In 1948 stig Moses Asch die Folkways -platemaatskappy, as 'n alternatief vir die meer algemene kommersiële etikette wat die onderneming oorheers het. Deel van Asch se projek was om die volksmusiek van gewone Amerikaners op te neem. Kind versamel sy ballades uit vrees dat dit verlore kan gaan. Dieselfde geld in die veertigerjare. Byvoorbeeld, die groot blues-musikant, Robert Johnson, is oorlede in 1938. Hy het slegs twee opnamesessies in sy lewe gedoen (en dit was ook mooi). Asch wou Amerika se volkstradisie opneem: onder sy vernaamste kunstenaars was Lead Belly, Pete Seeger en Woody Guthrie.

    Guthrie was 'n Okie, een van die vele duisende wat uit die mislukte landbou van die middelweste en suide na Kalifornië gevlug het. Daar maak Guthrie naam as die Oklahoma Cowboy, en sing en skryf liedjies in die ou Amerikaanse volksidioom. Baie was oor die ontberinge van gewone Amerikaanse werkende mense. Sy eerste album was Stofkomballades. Sy grootste liedjies, en daar was baie, kyk na 'n ander land. Sy bekendste lied, Hierdie land is jou land, was 'n antwoord op Irving Berlyn God seën Amerika:

    Hierdie land is vir jou en my gemaak

    Die Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC hou nou Guthrie's Asch -opnames, nadat sy gesin sy hele argief geskenk het. Die vorm vorm 'n belangrike deel van een van die groot skatte van die Amerikaanse kultuur.

    Guthrie vestig hom uiteindelik in New York, waar hy deel was van 'n musikale kollektief bekend as die Almanac Singers: hulle het die politieke radikalisme van Guthrie gedeel. Hy was ook in werklikheid uit die agtergrond van die werkersklas, in teenstelling met die res. Die sentrum van die Boheemse lewe in Manhattan was Greenwich Village. Die meeste van die Village -volkies was alles behalwe Okies, of iets daaraan.

    Neem die bekendste van die ander: Pete Seeger. Die Seegers was blou bloed aan die ooskus. Sy pa was 'n komponis en musikoloog, sy ma was konsertviolis. Charles Seeger was een van die pioniers van die etno-musiekwetenskap, die studie van volksmusiek. Sy tweede vrou, Ruth Crawford, was een van die belangrikste Amerikaanse modernistiese komponiste: sy was ook baie geïnteresseerd in volksmusiek. Al vier die kinders van Charles en Ruth ’ sou volksangers word (Peggy Seeger was een van hulle). Die jong Pete het by sy pa en stiefma gewoon toe hy nie op 'n kosskool was nie. Hy leer homself die ukulele, en dan die banjo. Teen die tyd dat Guthrie in New York kom, was Seeger 'n gevestigde volksanger by die Almanac Singers, wat later The Weavers geword het. In die vroeë ‘vyftigerjare het The Weavers 'n reeks groot treffers gehad. Hul weergawe van Lead Belly ’s Goeie nag Irene het in 1950 boaan die ranglys gekom.

    Seeger was ook 'n politieke radikaal. Musiek en radikale politiek het voorheen gemeng. Die bekendste was dat die groot Paul Robeson twee groot sondes gepleeg het in die oë van baie Amerikaners, beide swart en kommunisties (jy kan hier van hom lees). Woody Guthrie was simpatiek teenoor kommunisme, hoewel hy nooit by die party aangesluit het nie. Seeger het. In 1936, op die hoogtepunt van die Spaanse Burgeroorlog, het hy in 1942 by die Young Communist League aangesluit, hy het by die party self aangesluit. Hy verlaat die party in 1949, en teen die tyd van die Hongaarse Opstand raak hy ontnugter deur die kommunisme. Teen daardie tyd is hy egter voor die House Un-American Activities Committee ontbied.

    Dit was op die hoogtepunt van McCarthyisme. Soos die Hollywood Ten voor hom, het Seeger geweier om vrae en name te beantwoord. Dit het daartoe gelei dat hy skuldig bevind is aan minagting van die kongres en tronkstraf opgelê is (dit is in appèl omvergewerp). Seeger was ook op die swartlys. Dit was byvoorbeeld eers in die middel van die sestigerjare dat hy weer op televisie was.

    Teen daardie tyd was daar 'n landwye en internasionale volksherlewingsbeweging aan die gang. Regoor die VSA (en Brittanje) is volksklubs gebore, en 'n hele nuwe generasie volkskunstenaars is gebore. Sommige het grootskaalse kommersiële sukses behaal, dikwels deur gladde ruwe kante te vermy en moeilike politiek te vermy: mense soos die Kingston Trio pas by die rekening. In November 1959 was vier van die top tien verkoopalbums in die Billboard -lys hulle s'n.

    Peter, Paul en Mary het oor growwe rande glad gemaak, maar het die politiek nie vermy nie. In 1963 was hulle een van die volksangers wat hul stem tot die beroemde optog oor Washington gelei het waarin Martin Luther King sy 'I have a dream' -toespraak gehou het. Een van die liedjies wat hulle die dag gesing het, was As ek 'n hamer gehad het, wat geskryf is deur Seeger en Lee Hays. Op die wandeling van Selma na Montgomery het Seeger gesing Ons sal oorwin, wat die volkslied van die burgerregtebeweging geword het.

    Op die dag van die optog het die hele skare dit gesing, gelei deur een van die helderste sterre van die volksbeweging, Joan Baez (wat ook op die Montgomery na Selma -optog was). Teen 1961 was Baez 'n gevestigde volksster, met 'n topverkoper-album en New York-konserte op haar naam uitverkoop. Behalwe dat sy hom vir burgerregte beywer het, was sy ook 'n pasifis (haar gesin het Quakers geword).

    Op daardie beroemde dag in Washington sing Baez O vryheid (jy kan haar die liedjie hier sing).

    Sy het ook gesing As die skip inkom met Bob Dylan.

    Peter, Paul en Mary het ook 'n weergawe van Dylan's gesing Waai in die wind.

    Robert Zimmerman het eers in 1961 na New York gekom. Behalwe dat hy sy afgod, Woody Guthrie, in die hospitaal besoek het, het hy homself verander in Bob Dylan (en 'n pak vesels oor sy eie lewe en agtergrond gespin). Die belangrikste is dat hy in 1962 'n kanon liedjies geskryf het wat hom een ​​van die grotes sou maak. Hy was ook 'n ster. daar is twee plasings oor Dylan en die sewentigerjare: hier en hier. Vir eers moet ons die sentrale rolle besef wat Joan Baez en Pete Seeger gespeel het om die jong folkie uit die weste sy deurbraak te gee. En in sy nasleep sou volksmusiek (sowel as pop en rock) verander word.

    'N Ander kunstenaar op daardie dag in Washington was Josh White (hierbo gesien met Odetta Holmes). As Woody Guthrie egte wit vullis was, was White 'n swart man wat in armoede grootgemaak is, in die suide van Jim Crow. Hy is in 1914 in Suid -Carolina gebore as seun van pastoor. In 1921 het sy pa 'n onderonsie met 'n blanke gehad. Kort daarna is sy pa so erg geslaan dat hy sewe jaar lank in die hospitaal was, tot sy dood.

    Een van die kenmerke van swart lewe in die Suide was die rondreisende straatsanger. Dikwels was dit 'n manier waarop blinde mans 'n bestaan ​​kon maak. Een so 'n man was Blind Man Arnold. White word nou sy gids en geldinvorderaar. As sodanig verdien hy $ 2 per week om huis toe te stuur na sy ma en drie broers en susters. Gou is White verhuur aan ander sangers, veral Blind Joe Taggart (hieronder) en Blind Blake. White leer dans, sing en speel die tamboeryn. Toe leer hy die kitaar, waarmee hy die style van sy werkgewers leer aap het, en dan 'n paar.

    Teen 1927 was White in Chicago saam met Taggart, waar hy as sessieman op 'n aantal rekords gedien het. Uiteindelik het hy van Taggart losgekom en teruggekeer huis toe. White het egter nou 'n reputasie gehad, en in 1930 het die LNR -plate White se ma oorreed om hom te laat teken, op die belofte dat hy niks anders as Christelike musiek opneem nie. Toe hy in New York aankom, het hy wel godsdienstige musiek opgeneem onder die naam van Joshua White: The Signing Christian, maar ook die blues wat sy ma as die 'duiwelsmusiek' onder die naam Pinewood Tom opgeteken het, hy was ook 'n sessiespeler op numerous records. All through his career, White would have his serious political and religious side, but he also had his playful and overtly sexual one too he was also a superb guitarist.

    In 1940, White appeared with Paul Robeson in the musical John Henry. It was his breakthrough. Soon after, he had a six-month residency alongside Lead Belly at the Village Vanguard, one of Greenwich Village’s most famous venues. In his review of the show, Woody Guthrie called Lead Belly ‘the King of the 12-string Guitar’ and White the ‘Joe Louis of the Blues Guitar’ (Joe Louis was the former heavyweight champion of the world, and the greatest boxer of his age). White also performed with Libby Holman, a controversial torch singer (who was alleged to have killed her husband). What really made the paring controversial was the fact that Holman was White. When the pair offered their services to entertain troops in the war, they were turned down by the still-segregated US armed forces.

    White was now an established figure, so much so that he played at FDR’s inauguration in 1941. He was also political. A month later, he sang on an Almanac Brothers album, as did his wife, the gospel singer Carol Carr. Later that year, he released his own Southern Exposure: An Album of Jim Crow Blues, an album that was openly anti-segregationist. With help from acclaimed Harlem Renaissance poets Waring Cuney and Richard Wright, it was a lyrical masterpiece and instant hit.

    It was very controversial. Uncle Sam Says, directly condemned the government and the president for segregation in the army (something White’s brother had experienced). Roosevelt’s reaction was perhaps unexpected: he invited White to perform the album in its entirety for a command performance at the White House. After, White spent three hours talking and drinking with Roosevelt. Thereafter, he and his family were frequent visitors to FDR’s White House and Hyde Park holiday home. The Roosevelts were Godparents to White’s son, Josh Jr.

    He kept his close connections after the president’s death. His brother, Billy, was Eleanor Roosevelt’s chauffeur and house manager. His wife, Carol Carr, a gospel singer, appeared on the former first lady’s TV talk show. In 1950, White was touring Europe on a goodwill visit with Eleanor Roosevelt: in Stockholm, they drew a crowd of 50,000. By then, he also had a burgeoning career on Broadway and in the movie, such as the 1949 western, The Walking Hills:

    Then came the blacklist. He had often performed at Greenwich Village’s Café Society, America’s first integrated nightclub, opened in 1938. Café Society Uptown followed soon. It became a popular haunt of high society: Hollywood stars, New York and European socialites, even members of the Roosevelt family. Its luminaries sung, wrote (in the likes of Sing Out!) and campaigned. Whereas Under Roosevelt they might be the friend of a president, in the heated atmosphere of the McCarthyite era, Café Society and Greenwich Village was seen as a hotbed of communism.

    White was also an associate of Paul Robeson. White did not share Robeson’s communist sympathies. In 1950, he ‘voluntarily’ gave evidence to the HUAC (above, with his wife) and made public his opposition to communism and his disagreements with Robeson. White’s son believes he was put under very serious pressure by the FBI, who hauled him in on several occasions: he apparently told Robeson that the FBI had him ‘in a vice’. His testimony was powerful. He took the chance to tell his father’s story, powerfully and movingly. Not that it did him any good. Refusing to name names, he was blacklisted. His movie career was over, and he would not record in the USA until 1955.

    To make matters worse, the fact that he had volunteered to attend the committee and had condemned Robeson saw him shunned by the left as well. The circuit of folk clubs and campus gigs that kept blacklisted folkies in worked closed their doors to him. As is so often the case, sanctimonious middle class lefties polished their precious consciences and in doing so cut off a man who had not only be campaigning for civil rights while their moms changed their diapers, but had known genuine poverty, discrimination and violence. The only poverty many of those who now shunned White had known was probably the poverty wages their parents paid their hired help, or those who served them got.

    So, for much of the rest of his career he worked abroad: heaven had his own TV show in the UK, on Granada (ITV’s northwest division). He began to record again (the song above is from a 1958 album), but the ban from US television was only lifted when JFK invited him to appear on a CBS civil rights special, Dinner With the President, in 1963. He sung at LBJ’s inauguration in 1965. He also sung at the Lincoln memorial, on that famous day in 1963.

    Today, White’s legacy is in part kept alive by his son, Josh White Jr, here performing his father’s 1941 anti-segregationist classic, Southern Exposure.

    By 1969, White was dead. By then, of course, Martin Luther King and Kennedy were also dead. Johnson was no longer president. Woody Guthrie had died in 1967. The Civil Rights Act was law and legal segregation was disappearing into history. The folk movement had fractured the world and music had changed. Pete Seeger lived on until 2014. Joan Baez and Bob Dylan are still with us now, but that’s a whole other story.


    Meet the Ohio Senate candidate who likes white nationalists and hates gay people

    Three years after dropping out of his last Senate race, former Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel said Wednesday that he will seek the Republican nomination to replace retiring Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) next year. Now framing himself as a loyal Donald Trump acolyte, he brings to the race a long history of bigotry and defending extremists.

    In his announcement message, Mandel claimed that he was "motivated" to run by watching the "sham and unconstitutional impeachment" of Trump this week. He presented himself as someone who would fight for the defeated Trump's "America First Agenda" and "pulverize the Uniparty – that cabal of Democrats and Republicans who sound the same, stand for nothing and are more interested in cocktail party invites than defending the Constitution."

    Mandel served as Ohio's state treasurer from 2011 to 2019. He was the GOP nominee in 2012 against Sen. Sherrod Brown (D), losing 50.3% to 45.1% — well below the 48.2% of the vote Mitt Romney garnered on the same day in his unsuccessful challenge to President Barack Obama. He announced a 2018 rematch bid but quit the race, citing family medical issues.

    Like Trump, Mandel has a record of standing with bigots.

    In 2017, he attacked the Anti-Defamation League for including white nationalist-linked commentators Jack Posobiec and Mike Cernovich in a report on hateful extremists.

    "Sad to see @ADL_National become a partisan witchhunt group targeting people for political beliefs. I stand with @Cernovich & @JackPosobiec," he said in a since-deleted tweet.

    Days after Indiana Republican nominee Richard Mourdock infamously claimed in October 2012 Senate debate that pregnancies resulting from rape were a "gift from God," Mandel praised him, saying, "He's a gentleman. He's a class act. He's a thoughtful guy. He'll make a great United States senator."

    In 2011, he refused to divest a campaign contribution from a Nazi reenactor. His campaign dismissed calls to return or donate the money as a "manufactured nonissue."

    Mandel also had a rabidly anti-LGBTQ record of his own, opposing even domestic partnership benefits for same-sex couples, supporting the right of employers to fire someone just for being gay, fighting to bar gay Americans from serving openly in the military, and vowing to "never, ever back down" from the fight against marriage equality — even after his wife's cousin legally married another woman in Massachusetts.

    His record on other issues has also been extreme.

    He backed a 2011 Ohio law that would have prohibited collective bargaining for public employees. As law enforcement, educators, and firefighters mounted a successful referendum campaign to overturn the law, Mandel opposed their efforts, claiming the anti-worker measure was really "about respecting police, and firefighters, and teachers." Voters repealed the anti-union law by a 61.6 to 38.4 margin.

    In a 2012 interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Mandel rejected climate science, falsely saying research on global warming "is inconclusive and riddled with fraud.”

    He also dishonestly claimed that year that the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare, was a "government takeover of health care." He vowed to back efforts to repeal the law, which has since enabled hundreds of thousands of Ohioans to get health insurance coverage.

    Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


    The Roots of Josh Hawley’s Rage

    Why do so many Republicans appear to be at war with both truth and democracy?

    Ms. Stewart has reported on the religious right for more than a decade. She is the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.”

    In today’s Republican Party, the path to power is to build up a lie in order to overturn democracy. At least that is what Senator Josh Hawley was telling us when he offered a clenched-fist salute to the pro-Trump mob before it ransacked the Capitol, and it is the same message he delivered on the floor of the Senate in the aftermath of the attack, when he doubled down on the lies about electoral fraud that incited the insurrection in the first place. How did we get to the point where one of the bright young stars of the Republican Party appears to be at war with both truth and democracy?

    Mr. Hawley himself, as it happens, has been making the answer plain for some time. It’s just a matter of listening to what he has been saying.

    In multiple speeches, an interview and a widely shared article for Christianity Today, Mr. Hawley has explained that the blame for society’s ills traces all the way back to Pelagius — a British-born monk who lived 17 centuries ago. In a 2019 commencement address at the King’s College, a small conservative Christian college devoted to “a biblical worldview,” Mr. Hawley denounced Pelagius for teaching that human beings have the freedom to choose how they live their lives and that grace comes to those who do good things, as opposed to those who believe the right doctrines.

    The most eloquent summary of the Pelagian vision, Mr. Hawley went on to say, can be found in the Supreme Court’s 1992 opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. Mr. Hawley cited Justice Anthony Kennedy’s words reprovingly. “At the heart of liberty,” Justice Kennedy wrote, “is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” The fifth-century church fathers were right to condemn this terrifying variety of heresy, Mr. Hawley argued: “Replacing it and repairing the harm it has caused is one of the challenges of our day.”

    In other words, Mr. Hawley’s idea of freedom is the freedom to conform to what he and his preferred religious authorities know to be right. Mr. Hawley is not shy about making the point explicit. In a 2017 speech to the American Renewal Project, he declared — paraphrasing the Dutch Reformed theologian and onetime prime minister Abraham Kuyper — “There is not one square inch of all creation over which Jesus Christ is not Lord.” Mr. Kuyper is perhaps best known for his claim that Christianity has sole legitimate authority over all aspects of human life.

    “We are called to take that message into every sphere of life that we touch, including the political realm,” Mr. Hawley said. “That is our charge. To take the lordship of Christ, that message, into the public realm, and to seek the obedience of the nations. Of our nation!”

    Mr. Hawley has built his political career among people who believe that Shariah is just around the corner even as they attempt to secure privileges for their preferred religious groups to discriminate against those of whom they disapprove. Before he won election as a senator, he worked for Becket, a legal advocacy group that often coordinates with the right-wing legal juggernaut the Alliance Defending Freedom. He is a familiar presence on the Christian right media circuit.

    The American Renewal Project, which hosted the event where Mr. Hawley delivered his speech in 2017, was founded by David Lane, a political organizer who has long worked behind the scenes to connect conservative pastors and Christian nationalist figures with politicians. The choice America faces, according to Mr. Lane, is “to be faithful to Jesus or to pagan secularism.”

    The line of thought here is starkly binary and nihilistic. It says that human existence in an inevitably pluralistic, modern society committed to equality is inherently worthless. It comes with the idea that a right-minded elite of religiously pure individuals should aim to capture the levers of government, then use that power to rescue society from eternal darkness and reshape it in accord with a divinely approved view of righteousness.

    At the heart of Mr. Hawley’s condemnation of our terrifyingly Pelagian world lies a dark conclusion about the achievements of modern, liberal, pluralistic societies. When he was still attorney general, William Barr articulated this conclusion in a speech at the University of Notre Dame Law School, where he blamed “the growing ascendancy of secularism” for amplifying “virtually every measure of social pathology,” and maintained that “free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people.”

    Christian nationalists’ acceptance of President Trump’s spectacular turpitude these past four years was a good measure of just how dire they think our situation is. Even a corrupt sociopath was better, in their eyes, than the horrifying freedom that religious moderates and liberals, along with the many Americans who don’t happen to be religious, offer the world.

    That this neo-medieval vision is incompatible with constitutional democracy is clear. But in case you’re in doubt, consider where some of the most militant and coordinated support for Mr. Trump’s postelection assault on the American constitutional system has come from. The Conservative Action Project, a group associated with the Council for National Policy, which serves as a networking organization for America’s religious and economic right-wing elite, made its position clear in a statement issued a week before the insurrection.

    It called for members of the Senate to “contest the electoral votes” from Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and other states that were the focus of Republicans’ baseless allegations. Among the signatories was Cleta Mitchell, the lawyer who advised Mr. Trump and participated in the president’s call on Jan. 2 with Brad Raffensperger, Georgia’s secretary of state. Cosignatories to this disinformation exercise included Bob McEwen, the executive director of the Council for National Policy Morton C. Blackwell of the Leadership Institute Alfred S. Regnery, the former publisher Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council Thomas Fitton of Judicial Watch and more than a dozen others.

    Although many of the foot soldiers in the assault on the Capitol appear to have been white males aligned with white supremacist movements, it would be a mistake to overlook the powerful role of the rhetoric of religious nationalism in their ranks. At a rally in Washington on Jan. 5, on the eve of Electoral College certification, the right-wing pastor Greg Locke said that God is raising “an army of patriots.” Another pastor, Brian Gibson, put it this way: “The church of the Lord Jesus Christ started America,” and added, “We’re going to take our nation back!”

    In the aftermath of the Jan. 6 insurrection, a number of Christian nationalist leaders issued statements condemning violence — on both sides. How very kind of them. But few if any appear willing to acknowledge the instrumental role they played in perpetuating the fraudulent allegations of a stolen election that were at the root of the insurrection.

    They seem, like Mr. Hawley, to live in a post-truth environment. And this gets to the core of the Hawley enigma. The brash young senator styles himself not just a deep thinker who ruminates about late-Roman-era heretics but also a man of the people, a champion of “the great American middle,” as he wrote in an article for The American Conservative, and a foe of the “ruling elite.” Mr. Hawley has even managed to turn a few progressive heads with his economic populism, including his attacks on tech monopolies.

    Yet Mr. Hawley isn’t against elites op sigself. He is all for an elite, provided that it is a religiously righteous elite. He is a graduate of Stanford University and Yale Law School, and he clerked for John Roberts, the chief justice. Mr. Hawley, in other words, is a successful meritocrat of the Federalist Society variety. His greatest rival in that department is the Princeton debater Ted Cruz. They are résumé jockeys in a system that rewards those who do the best job of mobilizing fear and irrationalism. They are what happens when callow ambition meets the grotesque inequalities and injustices of our age.

    Over the past few days, after his participation in the failed efforts to overturn the election, Mr. Hawley’s career prospects may have dimmed. Two of his home state newspapers have called for his resignation his political mentor, John C. Danforth, a former Republican senator from Missouri, has described his earlier support for Mr. Hawley as “the biggest mistake I’ve ever made” and Simon & Schuster dropped his book. On the other hand, there is some reporting that suggests his complicity in efforts to overturn the election may have boosted his standing with Mr. Trump’s base. But the question that matters is not whether Mr. Hawley stays or goes but whether he is simply replaced by the next wannabe demagogue in line. We are about to find out whether there are leaders of principle left in today’s Republican Party.

    Make no mistake: Mr. Hawley is a symptom, not a cause. He is a product of the same underlying forces that brought us Mr. Trump and the present crisis of American democracy. Unless we find a way to address these forces and the fundamental pathologies that drive them, then next month or next year we will be forced to contend with a new and perhaps more successful version of Mr. Hawley.

    Katherine Stewart (@kathsstewart) is the author of “The Power Worshippers: Inside the Dangerous Rise of Religious Nationalism.”


    After 93 Years, Uncle Josh to Stop Producing Pork Rinds

    Though, it may seem a bit far-fetched, many of the striped bass I’ve landed from the beaches of the Northeast have been the indirect result of a frog shortage in Wisconsin during the summer of 1921. Let me explain.

    You see, long-time fishing buddies Urban Schreiner and World War I veteran, Allen P. Jones were both very fond of using live frogs as bait. When fishing season rolled around in 1921, the two planned to spend much of their time catching black bass in Wisconsin’s Jordan Lake. They liked to cast plugs during the morning and evening hours, and fish live frogs during the middle of the day when the bass became unreceptive to artificial lures. That summer, however, frogs were tough to come by around Jordan Lake, and with these amphibians being the best way to catch bass during the heat of the day, Jones and Schreiner contemplated how they might be able to “create” their own frog from some other materials.

    The quest to make their own frog brought them to a butcher in Oxford, Wisconsin, where they took a slab of fatback with the rind on, and cut from it a number of frog-shaped pieces. Throughout the summer of 1921, the two experimented with the shape, looking for one with sufficient tail action and enough meat for the fish to smell and the angler to cast.

    The bait turned out to be so successful, that in 1922, Jones and Schreiner founded the Uncle Josh Bait Company in Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin to sell their pork rind creations. Jones’ “day job” was at the Jones Dairy Farm, where he slaughtered hogs and made sausage. This made starting a new company that made baits from raw pork rind a relatively simple leap. The company was named for a farmer on Jordan Lake who reminded Jones and Schreiner of one of their favorite comedic characters, Uncle Josh, a rube with a penchant for fighting.

    This large striper, like many before it, fell to a bucktail jig tipped with Uncle Josh Pork Rind. Uncle Josh will no longer be producing pork products, and after the remaining inventory is sold, it will be gone.

    The first order was for $300 worth of the model now called the #11 Pork Frog. By 1923, the company offered several other baits, a bass and fly strip, which consisted of just the pork skin, and a “chunk,” which was an oval-shaped bait made up of both the skin and the fat. The original baits were white, but Jones worked with a dye to turn the skin on some of the pork frogs green, although getting the dye to stay on the skin was problematic.

    In addition to setting the dye, the greatest challenge for the Uncle Josh Bait Company was figuring out how to properly cure the pork back fat and skin so that it wouldn’t spoil. Though Jones had experience curing bacon on his family’s dairy farm, curing the pork baits proved to be a bit more difficult, and once packed in glass jars, the baits would spoil and reek.

    They did eventually figure it out. The Uncle Josh Bait Company would put 3-foot-long slabs of fatback through a 2-week-long curing process before cutting them into baits and dying them. The baits were then packed into jars filled with a salt brine, which simply consisted of a heavy dose of salt and water.

    On the water, most Uncle Josh baits work best when paired with another lure to give it more action. One of the most popular combinations is the “jig-and-pig” in which an Uncle Josh pork frog is married to a skirted bass jig to make it resemble a crayfish underwater. A saltwater version of the jig-and-pig consists of a bucktail jig tipped with a pork rind strip. A variety of sizes and styles can also be added to spoons and spinnerbaits in freshwater, and umbrella jigs, tube lures an even spreader bars in saltwater. The skin of the pork undulates tantalizingly on even the slowest retrieves, enticing a large number of gamefish in a variety of situations. The addition of the pork also causes the lure to sink more slowly, making it linger in the strike zone on the fall and allowing for slower retrieves.

    Tipping lures with pork rind instead of soft-plastic baits had a number of advantages. Though soft-plastic baits are easier to store and come in a greater variety of colors and shapes, even the most supple soft plastics can’t match the action of a pork rind fluttering through the water. Natural products will always appear more life-like underwater, ask any fly tier, and pork rinds are no exception. Pork rind baits are also much more durable than their soft-plastic counterparts. While even a glancing blow from a bluefish will render any soft-plastic bait useless, I have never had a single pork rind chopped by the yellow-eyed devils.

    Just don’t forget to remove the pork rind from your hook and return it to the brine-filled jar after each trip. Otherwise, the bait will shrivel up and harden. This advice should be filed under the “Do as I say, not what I do” category, since I neglect to remove the pork rind from my bucktails so often that I think I could reconstruct an entire pig from the dried-up 70-S Striper Strips littered throughout the back of my truck. But, if you can remember to restore your baits to their jars, a single pork rind will survive weeks, even months, of heavy fishing.

    Unfortunately, in mid-December of this year, word began circulating that Uncle Josh would no longer be producing pork rind baits. The issue, explained a company representative, is that Uncle Josh has been unable to get the quality fatback they need to produce durable pork baits. These days, pigs are brought to slaughter at 6 months old, rather than 2 to 3 years old, which means the skin and fatback are thinner and no longer suitable for fishing baits. There is still Uncle josh available for purchase on their website, and at tackle retailers throughout the Northeast. Once it’s gone, it’s gone. Just be sure not to let your remaining pork rinds dry out on the hook.


    A timeline of Josh Gordon’s history with substance abuse and suspensions

    Josh Gordon walks off the field after a game against the Pittsburgh Steelers. AP Photo/David Richard, File

    Patriots wide receiver Josh Gordon announced Thursday he is stepping away from football to focus on his mental health.

    According to NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero, Gordon is facing another indefinite suspension for violating the terms of his reinstatement under the league’s substance abuse policy.

    New England took a risk in September when they acquired Gordon from the Cleveland Browns in exchange for a fifth-round draft pick. Throughout his six-year tenure in Cleveland, Gordon battled substance abuse and faced several suspensions from the league. He hasn’t been active for a full NFL season since his rookie year.


    Kyk die video: Josh WAWA White - Different Flavors Official Music Video (Desember 2021).