Revenge Politics

Donald Trump just issued an executive order to the Department of Homeland Security, part of which requires them to publicly shame municipalities that refuse to deport illegal immigrants by listing the names of such individuals in those communities (and only those communities) who have committed crimes. Meanwhile, Ill Douche also wants to do whatever he can to make it more difficult for any illegal immigrant to earn an income... and nothing motivates criminal behavior quite like the desperation of poverty.

See where this is going?

These lists will continue to expand in their inclusivity, not only providing Trump with repeated opportunities to say, "Hey, America. I told you so! See... my brain works good!" but it also tells redneck vigilantes who to look for and where they can find the "least American" among us while denying these individuals their basic human rights. Trump has also vowed to give more authority to local police to gather these immigrants for deportation, which may very well mean bringing on some wildcard deputies who are just in it for the bullshit patriotism and the opportunity to shoot people who don't look and think like them.

Of course, it's only a matter of time before somebody decides that any illegal aliens deserve to be on this list simply by virtue of their illegal status. This is how it starts. First it's just the bad [insert ethnic group here] people. Then once this becomes normalized, it becomes anyone who even looks like that, and on it goes until we wake up in some shitty dystopian future where lists of accused dissidents are made public and their punishments are enforceable through the intervention of ordinary citizens. You see, by turning people against each other, they are far less likely to unite in opposition to the policies that divide and oppress them. Every dictator who has ever won an election knows that.

But let's take a step back from this and look at how specifically targeted this executive action is. Not only is it aimed primarily at Muslims and Latinos, but it also targets certain cities which have refused to deport illegal immigrants. You see, Trump has vowed to cut off all federal funding to these cities unless they comply with the new rules. This goes back to that idea of turning people against each other, but it has the added bonus of legitimizing their bigotry. How do you make non-racist working-class citizens support this kind of socially regressive policy? The answer: by punishing them for even "allowing" these illegal immigrants to live and work in "their" city and nation. Trump is using the same playbook as plenty of tyrants before him, updated for the age of reality television and instant media.

Here is a map of "Sanctuary Jurisdictions," according to the Center for Immigration Studies:

And here is a county-by-county map of 2016 US Presidential election:

Maybe you see a pattern here. No, I'm not saying that this is one of those pictures that if you stare at it long enough, you're supposed to see a 3-D image of the Statue of Liberty, but you might notice some interesting similarities between these two maps.

Some will say that there is no image,
or that the emperor wears no clothes.

Here's another map that someone made from the election results to indicate the United States of Trump:

Dark red indicates the areas in the country where it is most difficult to find a decent falafel.

And according to those same metrics, here are the liberal strongholds:

See, media doesn't exist in bubbles. It exists on tiny islands. 

Just for fun, here's that map of sanctuary cities again:

Weird, right? It's as though the Trump administration is trying to punish the same communities that nearly cost him the election, while turning working-class people against each other so that they don't notice their government being sold off piece-by-piece to the highest bidder. It seems that he is trying to wipe those liberal islands off the map -- in addition to all of the real islands that will disappear as a direct result of his terrible environmental policies.

If we let these things become normal, then the situation will only continue to deteriorate until these States are no longer United.

A Brief Article About Underwear, Including a Story About a Boxer

Underwear. Under where? We’ll get to that. But first…



It All Started with Comedy

The word 'pants' comes from the term 'pantaloon,' which gets its name from a stock character in the 16th-century Italian commedia dell’arte named Pantalone.

While most men at that time wore knee-breeches, Pantalone wore his bright red fancy-pants all the way to the ankle. This was to hide his legs, which were said to be skinny from never having done any manual labor. Like all the characters of these traveling comedy troupes, he was an archetype who stood for something bigger. Pantalone represented money and greed.

Pantaloons, as they came to be known, were made of two separate pantlegs which were then secured at the waist. A cod piece covered the rest. The cape was presumably optional. Over time, pants became etymologically linked to underpants and underwear. This is why we say “pair of underwear” today, even though the garment to which we are referring is singular.



Women Didn’t Start Wearing Panties Until the Late Eighteenth Century, Bras the Twentieth Century

First of all, I know that some of you are not particularly fond of the word 'panties.' I'm not really a fan myself. But if you think that's an ugly word, back in ancient Rome, they wore something called a subligaculum, which even my spell-check is giving me shit about.

As long as we're on the topic of European history and underwear... I see London and I see France, but if I went to either of those places around the time of the American Revolution, I can say with some certainty that I wouldn’t have seen any women’s underpants, in large part because very few women wore them back then. Petticoats were far more common for those who could afford them. Most women squatted in alleys or fields to piss anyway and it was far more practical to not have anything in the way.

In 1727, a ballerina accidentally exposed herself to a Parisian audience. This "scandal" led to the creation of the first law that required women to wear underwear -- but even then, it only applied to actresses and dancers on stage. Most women knew that it was healthier to not wear underwear, because going commando, especially back then, meant that they were less prone to yeast infections and UTIs. Keep in mind, this was before antibiotics.

I include this image primarily in reference to antibiotics.

Women’s underwear didn’t really take off (so to speak) until bicycles became popular in the late nineteenth century. Even then, this is why the cross-bar on women’s bikes is lower. It was designed that way so that women's dresses would not be lifted as they pedaled, because there was a pretty good chance that they weren’t wearing anything underneath.

Bras, on the other hand (so to speak), weren’t commonly worn until the 1920s. The modern elastic-boob-holder was invented by Mary Phelps Jacob in 1913. Howard Hughes also once tried to design a bra. He figured that if he could develop something as complex as a movie or an airplane, then he could certainly make something as simple as a women’s undergarment. Of course, anyone who has ever struggled with bra straps can see the flaw in his logic.




Clark Gable May Have Killed the Undershirt

In the 1934 Frank Capra movie It Happened One Night, there is a scene where Clark Gable takes off his shirt, revealing his manly bare chest beneath. According to some sources, the undergarment industry took a nosedive after that, because men realized that if Clark Gable didn’t have to wear an undershirt, then screw it… why should they?

Newspapers at the time reported that sales of undershirts declined by about 75% because of this one scene, although no actual sales figures were ever released. That said, while this account has never officially been proven nor disproven, it makes sense. After all, this was the Great Depression, and people were no doubt looking for ways to save money.

Victoria’s Secret is that She Never Existed

The first Victoria’s Secret opened in Palo Alto, California in 1977. The owner, Roy Raymond, picked the name to match the interior design, which was inspired by Victorian-era architecture. This is why stores today include elements like dark wood, silk drapes and deep colors. Barring the Queen of England in the late-nineteenth century, it is not named after anyone named Victoria.

But if it was, her other secret would be in figuring out how to charge fifty bucks for a fancy undergarment that most people will never see or eighty dollars for a sweatshirt that says PINK when I can see with my own goddamn eyes that it's blue.

Long Johns are Named After a Famous Boxer from the 1880s

Thermal underwear, commonly referred to as “long johns,” were originally issued to American soldiers who were stationed in cold climates during World War II. These undergarments got their name from a famous boxer named John L. Sullivan, who wore a similar style of pants when he fought.

Seen here putting up his dukes:

Because long johns (i.e., flannel tights) were once associated with tough guys. Now that only works if you happen to be a superhero.

Mormons Have Their Own Special Underwear

Mormons believe that the Garden of Eden once existed in what is now Missouri and that this is where Jesus will live when he returns to earth. That's not a joke, but if you want to read it as one, that's fine.

Incidentally, this is a place where people commonly drink a beverage called the Chelada, which is a delectable combination of Bud Light and Clamato, itself a delightful blend of tomato juice and squeezed clam... all because somebody had the brilliant idea to juice a mollusk, then mix it with two other things that are equally disgusting. Drink of the god(s)? I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

Mormons, who generally abstain from alcohol, are issued holy (but never holey) underwear to serve as a tidy-white reminder of their commitment to their faith. Many within the Church also believe that their undies will protect them from harm… you know, like a pair of lucky socks, or better yet: a helmet. Then again, when an organized religion starts issuing magic helmets, you might want to think about where this is all going.

Tights Were Once Exclusively Worn by Men

The idea of shapely legs being a feminine characteristic is a relatively presentist perspective. In ancient Greece and Rome, the men wore the shorter togas and robes, while women commonly covered their legs. Cause if you've got it, flaunt it.

The same was true in Shakespeare’s time, when men commonly wore tights to highlight the shapes of their lower appendages. It wasn't just actors, either.

David Bowie tried to bring it back, but that man was too far ahead of his time. In fact, I suspect he may have been from the future.

Actually, tights for men are making a comeback.

It's like history repeats itself or something...

Cerealized

If you've ever lived outside of the US, you know that most other countries don't really do breakfast cereal the way that we do. This is one thing that Americans truly do better than the rest of the world. While other countries may only have a few varieties to choose from, we have entire aisles in our supermarkets dedicated to this one item.

You can imagine how competitive the breakfast cereal industry has to be when you literally have fifty or more kinds to choose from at the grocery store. Much like twenty-four hour news channels or Tyler Perry's production company, the need to keep up with the constant demand for new product can result in some pretty misguided efforts. Here are some of the worst ideas that ever got the go-ahead from breakfast cereal executives:



Urkel-Os

In the first season of Family Matters, Urkel took over the show. Then he tried to take over breakfast tables across America.

"Did I do that...?" Yes, Jaleel. You did.

The original boxes of the cereal described it as a "Fun, circle-shaped product." This, of course, could be referring to anything from a hula hoop to a steering wheel cover, which are two things that I also have no interest in eating. On the other hand, at least they don't taste like artificial banana and strawberry. I try to make it a general rule to not eat anything that might compel me to lick my armpits just to get the flavor out of my mouth.

By the way, here is the original commercial, because you know you want to watch it. And if you're wondering what Jaleel White is up to these days, maybe you could send him a letter.

WWF Superstars Cereal

Now with more sweat! Clearly meant to be a competitor to Mr. T Cereal and King Vitamin, I can imagine them all in a tag-team cage match together.

Be careful, though. Some of the more hardcore fans get pissed when you tell them that the vanilla flavoring is totally fake.

They had to take this product off the market when children everywhere were coming down with intense bouts of Hulkamania. Symptoms included speaking in grunts and an inexplicable propensity to wear bandanas.

Crunchy Loggs

Because who wouldn’t want a turd-shaped cereal that seems as though it was designed to taste like pencil shavings?

Ever notice how in most grocery stores, the cereals aimed at kids are all stocked at their eye level? This is one industry that has always been pretty direct about shamelessly marketing their products to children. Not only do they want these kids to beg their parents for this crap, but in this case (and many others) they also purposefully misspell words on the box. That seems irresponsible to me, just because I have to believe that it only makes learning how to spell all the more confusing when corporations take artistic license with the goddamn language. Never mind how many kids went on to eat actual logs after this.




Grins & Smiles & Giggles & Laughs

First of all, grins and smiles are pretty much the same thing, as are giggles and laughs. The terms are as redundant as me explaining it again in this sentence.

I assume that the pitch meeting for this product went something like this: “Fuck it. Let’s just go with all four of the names and get back to our crippling cocaine addictions.” Seriously, though, what the hell is that thing on the box? It appears to be some kind of mad scientist creation with cereal for a brain and ears for a nose. If the packaging is any indication, I assume that this crazy contraption was designed to turn children's laughter into yellow pellets of styrofoam insulation.

If you're not confused yet, watch the commercial.




Pink Panther Flakes

This one’s kind of crazy if you trace the lineage.

First, The Pink Panther was a 1963 comedy starring Peter Sellers. The movie is about a diamond heist, and the name of the gem that the characters are all after is the "pink panther." In the opening credits, as was relatively common at the time, there was an extended animated sequence that gave the audience the opportunity to buy some concessions and find their seats. In this movie, the animators chose to take the name of the movie literally and drew an actual pink cat outsmarting the always-foolish Inspector Clouseau to the tune of a certain Henry Mancini song. These same animated characters were then featured in a television show of their own in the seventies. It aired for a few seasons, and then it was resurrected in the eighties, at which point somebody thought that it would also make a good "pink-flavored" breakfast cereal. Because the eighties was full of great ideas...

To truly appreciate the irony of this photo, watch Permanent Midnight.

Sugar Sparkled Rice Krinkles

Again with the purposeful misspelling. The word is Crinkles, damn it! This one also featured a racially insensitive stereotype named So-Hi, which I think you would have to be in order to consume this. How high? So-Hi... I don't recommend ever attempting to eat breakfast cereal with chopsticks, either. Besides, the milk in that picture is clearly white glue. Don't do it, So-Hi! It's an imperialist trap! They just want to steal your resources!

OJ's

This product came out in 1985, years before any OJ Simpson/cereal killer jokes would have made any sense.

If you're wondering if this was any good, go pour yourself a bowl of Kix cereal with some milk, then dump a glass of orange juice into it. Sounds terrible, right? Rather than pour a new bowl, some breakfast cereal executive decided to just run with it.

Wheaties Dunk-a-Balls

Kids would probably never make fun of a cereal product with the word “balls” right there in the name, right? Dunk-a-balls… No, that doesn’t even sound vaguely dirty.

Much like the product itself, I'm guessing that whichever executive suggested the tagline of "Dunk your balls in it!" was also only available for a limited time after that.

Educating the American School System

Here are eight problems with the American education system and how to fix them:




Standardized Testing

Let’s start with the easy one. Standardized testing produces pupils who are good at memorizing stuff for just long enough to pass an exam. Meanwhile, far too many of them aren't learning how to be engaged citizens who think critically. We should do away with these tests in order to give teachers and school boards more input in the curriculum. That's how it's supposed to work, and when we don't, it doesn't. Chances are, the teachers who know the names and faces of their students probably understand their needs better than some bureaucrat who knows nothing about their lived experiences. 

Speaking of which, this is Betsy DeVos, the new Secretary of Education:

Her dad was the billionaire who founded Amway, which has proven to be one of the most profitable pyramid schemes since Scientology... so I'm guessing she probably didn't spend a lot of time in public schools and yellow busses when she was a kid.  

DeVos will want to privatize our education system under the false pretense that the increased competition will bring out the best in everyone. After all, it worked for Amway, didn't it? That might be how it seems from the top of the pyramid. Meanwhile, the people at the bottom are still waiting for the wealth to trickle down. 

Schools whose students never had a fair chance to begin with will be closed and left to decay in already broken neighborhoods. And do you know what brings down residential property value in urban areas? Abandoned schools. Then again, maybe that's the long con.

When it comes down to it, capitalism itself is a pyramid scheme, and it has no business in our schools. If this perverse coexistence between corporate America and our education system seems natural, it's probably only because that's what you were taught in school. The neoliberal ideology is not a panacea for all that ails us as a nation. Not everything can be measured in dollars. If we learn anything from our mistakes, it should be plainly obvious that there are plenty of problems that unfettered capitalism only make worse. 

For starters, kids are being taught that "n" is an adequate substitute for "and"
and that Little Caesars is an adequate substitute for food. 

On the same token, standardized tests are a failed attempt at quantifying that which is fundamentally qualitative. They measure short-term memorization of facts, when students should really be learning how to learn. As far as the teachers are concerned, these tests are a more accurate measure of how prepared their students were before setting foot in their classroom than they are any indication of teaching ability. Furthermore, just as individual students process and retain information differently from one another, teachers may also have very different methods of conveying knowledge to their pupils. 

The current one-size-fits-all approach does not work. Standardized testing stifles creativity while taking the passion out of both learning and teaching. We need to give instructors respect enough to let them do their jobs, if for no other reason than because students are more likely to learn effectively when teachers are allowed to lead the classroom with a style and emphasis that best accommodates everyone involved. 




Worker Bees

Back in the 1910s, Andrew Carnegie helped centralize power within the American education system for the purpose of achieving uniformity in the curricula. Carnegie, of course, had an agenda. The idea was to essentially program America's youth into supporting the very system that had made him one of the wealthiest men in the world at that time. This was done by distancing students from the influence of their families and communities through the creation of school districts. Education was no longer localized. Meanwhile, American schools were redesigned to produce employees who could follow directions but not think critically about this system that exploits their labor while hindering their individuality.

Carnegie actually drew from many of the same ideas that would soon become prevalent in Nazi Germany. That is, just as Hitler believed that some people were just born better than others, so too does the American education system. This is why we have well-funded schools for rich kids and chronically underfunded schools for everybody else. 

Try to guess which of these systems puts more emphasis on creativity, balance and leadership, and which is designed to produce employees who follow orders...




Based on Age

For the first twelve or so years of education, your grade is based on your age. Then you get to college, where you take classes that are at your ability level. 

Wouldn't it make more sense if all of your education was like this? 

In elementary school, teachers set the smart kids aside so that they can teach to the lowest common denominator. Everyone else is bored, but that's how it goes. Never mind the fact that people learn differently and at different rates. 

Here in the US, kindergarten start date is based on your birthday, which makes it about as scientifically grounded as astrology.




Public Schools are Funded by Land Taxes

The reason rich kids go to nice schools and poor kids go to shitty schools is because most of the funding for those schools comes from property taxes... and the occasional bake sale. Technically, it's the fact that rich kids' parents own expensive real estate that explains why they'll have a decent chance at getting accepted to an Ivy League university after high school, which will then likely lead to a decent six figure salary at a reputable company. 

Or maybe even the Presidency.

George W. Bush didn't get accepted to Harvard and Yale because he was an ace student, nor do I think that the quality of education is inherently better at any Ivy League school than it is at a state university. Rather, I think that "academic pedigree" merely serves to perpetuate these same class divides into adulthood.

In most countries, it’s not like this. School funding is distributed equally, so that all citizens have access to the same quality of education. 

Crazy, right?



College Students are Indentured by Loan Debt

Along these same lines, students from wealthy families often have parents who can pay for their educations, whereas just about everyone else has to take out huge loans that may very well hang over their heads for the rest of their lives. Once again, capitalism has no business in our schools. The more our education system is treated like a business, the more the "customers" are getting screwed. 

I'm sorry to break it to you, but that's how capitalism works. That profit has to come from somewhere, and the bigger a business gets, the more hands there are taking cuts and the bigger those cuts get. Why? Because they can. Capitalism is built on the principle of constant expansion. Not once has a corporation ever stopped while it was ahead. 

It's also hard to promote the value of higher education when it puts the people who attain it so deeply in debt. This breeds anti-intellectualism because it makes the uneducated feel smart for having not pursued a college degree. I don't think I need to remind anyone of the electoral ramifications that come from fostering a general distrust of knowledge and intelligence. If you don't watch the news, at least watch Idiocracy.

Most of the Money in Higher Education Goes to Administration

Approximately seventy percent of classes at public universities are taught by grad students, adjuncts or other non-tenure faculty. Meanwhile, the costs associated with higher education have been outpacing inflation for decades. If teachers are getting paid less (and cumulatively, they most certainly are), then where is all that money going?

Part of treating higher education like a business and students like customers is that colleges are now in the business of competing for these prospective customers by offering superfluous amenities. A university may layoff a number of teachers so that some new dorms can be built with better wi-fi, or put a freeze on hiring tenure-track faculty while giving the Vice President of Internal Marketing Strategies and Other Related Bullshit a ridiculous bonus. Meanwhile, university presidents are praised for achieving short-term financial gains through privatization while destroying their schools from the inside out. 




Sports are a Huge Part of School

Quick, who or what is your school mascot? Ok, follow-up questions: Why does that matter in the slightest, and what has school spirit ever done for you? The only reason that people are enthusiastic about pep rallies in the first place is because they don't have to go to fifth period. Everybody knows that.

I remember the handmade posters in the hall that would accompany home games, and I have to say, crushing one's opponent seems a bit harsh. It's just a stupid game, after all. Sports teach kids tribal mentalities. My school can beat up your school! My state is better than your state! The athletes wearing our school colors can throw, kick or hit balls better than their counterparts at the place where you go to school! It's kind of ridiculous if you think about it. I say this as someone from Michigan who currently lives in Ohio and who gives precisely zero shits about any kind of intercollegiate rivalry between these states. 

Schools spend so much money on athletics that could be put toward actual education. Even at universities, unless the teams are regularly televised on national broadcasts, sports programs almost invariably lose money. The idea is that these programs will keep alumni connected to their alma mater, which will make them more inclined to make donations, and this is how they justify the enormous expenses of building a new stadium or sending the badminton team to the next state over in a chartered bus. In actuality, these programs are subsidized by those constant tuition increases. Go sports!

In most other countries, sports clubs are completely separate from educational institutions. And why shouldn't they be?


School Lunches are a Bad Joke

Ever hear the one about the mean lunch lady who served nasty food? Well it doesn't have to be like that. There is no reason that our kids should have to eat processed garbage, and cafeteria attendants, please remember that it's not their fault your life turned out this way. 

Nutrition is a critical component of children's physical, psychological and intellectual development, and kids learn more than just their ABCs at school. We need to teach them healthy eating habits, which also means keeping fast food and vending machines out of schools. The more we allow this to be normal, the more normalized it becomes... and a school without any principles is like a school without any principals, either of which can only lead to chaos.

People always talk about how valuable children are to our future, but then we let the foundation of our education system crumble from within. 

We can and must do better.