thenation--2020-11-26--The Collapse of the Cuomosexual

The Collapse of the Cuomosexual

The Andrew Cuomo New Yorkers know and mostly tolerate , the snarling attack dog who gaslights fellow Democrats and deploys staff to call his female critics “ fucking idiots , ” dropped down to Earth last week .
It was a hard landing after a long-distance love affair with a fanbase in a galaxy far , far away .
In the middle of one of his now Emmy Award–winning ( apparently for using “ television to inform and calm people around the world ” ) Red Room press conferences , the governor blew a gasket .
The trouble started when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asked the obvious question that every New York City public school parent wanted to know : Will schools be open tomorrow ?
Cuomo ’ s months ( years , really ) of pissing all over Mayor Bill de Blasio have naturally caused confusion over who owns this loser of a decision , compounded by the fact that the city ( 3 percent ) and state ’ s ( 2.5 percent ) data on infection rates don ’ t align .
So rather than give a straight answer , the self-described “ cool dude @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Trump-style tantrum .
“ First of all let ’ s try not to be obnoxious and offensive in your tone because you ’ re 100 percent wrong , these laws have all been in effect for months , ” referring to the state ’ s 3 percent threshold for closings .
“ I don ’ t know if you were here , or you were paying attention.
” Should We Have a Right to Troll Politicians on Twitter ?
From there it devolved quickly into a hot screeching mess : “ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the law !
An orange zone and a red zone !
Follow the facts !
” Vielkind pressed on : “ I ’ m confused .
Parents are still confused as well.
” “ They ’ re not confused , ” Cuomo snapped back , never answering the question .
“ You ’ re confused !
Read the law , and they won ’ t be confused.
” When a New York Times reporter chimed in that he too was confused , the governor brushed it aside as a media conspiracy : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you think .
Of course you agree with him , because you ’ re in the same business with him.
” The whole show ended with Cuomo standing behind the dais shouting at the entire room , “ New Yorkers are doing a great job , and don ’ t demean them .
It ’ s disrespectful to New Yorkers !
” Or maybe just the one ?
Cuomo undeniably offered a vision of competent , humane government at the height of the crisis , but this is who he is the rest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why he and his staff reflexively insult anyone who criticizes his handling of the pandemic or insists on returning to the normal system of democratic governance as Jefferson envisioned it .
People like the relentlessly honest Bill Hammond from the Empire Center for Public Policy , who ’ s currently suing the administration to force it to disclose the real number of Covid-related nursing home deaths ( “ yet another publicity stunt from an arm of the far-right advocacy industrial complex ” ) .
Or Assembly member Ron Kim for suggesting that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letting his state be one of the two that grant hospitals and nursing homes broad corporate immunity ( “ politically motivated ” ) .
Or Democratic and Republican lawmakers who want to curtail the governor ’ s emergency powers after granting them in March , and return to their role as a co-equal branch of government ( “ stupid ” and “ completely political ” ) .
It all boils down to this : Any dissent is a partisan attack on our very lives , and Andrew Cuomo is our only hope .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s even written a self-congratulatory book at what he calls “ half-time ” in the crisis .
Kind of like how every coach puts out a press release mid-game and Winston Churchill wrote the history of World War II in 1943 .
Oh , wait… Indeed , St. Andrew , our savior of the spring , is now milking his 15 minutes of fame for an extra 30 .
That ’ s the problem with local reporters , who aren ’ t your sycophantic brother or the rest of the national media ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your image .
Say what you will about de Blasio , but he sits for twice-weekly interviews with Errol Louis on NY1 and Brian Lehrer on WNYC .
New Yorkers know where to tune in to see their mayor submit to regular scrutiny and call in to ask direct questions .
Cuomo ’ s desperately curated image is more than half the reason he ’ s the dominant player over the mayor , but he still can ’ t seem to keep his vanity in check .
The book is an undignified victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him legitimate praise to begin with , underscoring the point that for Cuomo it was always more about presentation than substance .
A reassuring performance made immortal by an actual performer , Maria DeCotis , in her pitch-perfect parodies .
The whole thing was already very Through the Looking Glass before the International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences announced on Friday that they were awarding the governor an Emmy for his “ television shows with characters , plot lines , and stories of success and failure.
” Next he ’ ll be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , taking three points off the back end .
Aside from having just barely survived the delusion that elevated a reality TV character to the presidency , we ’ re now giving a real-life governor an entertainment award for doing his actual job .
Where does that leave governors like Michigan ’ s Gretchen Witmer , who also gave press briefings , but didn ’ t take a bow—and got death threats instead ?
There ’ s something genuinely depressing about seeing the son of a man who refused a seat on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Ben Stiller .
It ’ s almost hard to remember how he ridiculed two-time Emmy Award–winner Cynthia Nixon back in 2018 for being an unqualified celebrity .
Turns out he just wanted to trade places all along .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
He’s baaack!
The Andrew Cuomo New Yorkers know and mostly tolerate, the snarling attack dog who gaslights fellow Democrats and deploys staff to call his female critics “fucking idiots,” dropped down to Earth last week. It was a hard landing after a long-distance love affair with a fanbase in a galaxy far, far away.
In the middle of one of his now Emmy Award–winning (apparently for using “television to inform and calm people around the world”) Red Room press conferences, the governor blew a gasket. The trouble started when Jimmy Vielkind from The Wall Street Journal asked the obvious question that every New York City public school parent wanted to know: Will schools be open tomorrow? Cuomo’s months (years, really) of pissing all over Mayor Bill de Blasio have naturally caused confusion over who owns this loser of a decision, compounded by the fact that the city (3 percent) and state’s (2.5 percent) data on infection rates don’t align. So rather than give a straight answer, the self-described “cool dude in a loose mood,” threw a Trump-style tantrum.
“First of all let’s try not to be obnoxious and offensive in your tone because you’re 100 percent wrong, these laws have all been in effect for months,” referring to the state’s 3 percent threshold for closings. “I don’t know if you were here, or you were paying attention.” More From Alexis Grenell The Masculinity of Lucas Kunce’s Bid for the US Senate July 17, 2023 Does Fatima Mousa Mohammed Oppose Israel’s Very Existence? June 8, 2023 Is It Sexist to Demand That Feinstein Resign? May 30, 2023
From there it devolved quickly into a hot screeching mess: “We did it already! That’s the law! An orange zone and a red zone! Follow the facts!”
Vielkind pressed on: “I’m confused. Parents are still confused as well.”
“They’re not confused,” Cuomo snapped back, never answering the question. “You’re confused! Read the law, and they won’t be confused.” When a New York Times reporter chimed in that he too was confused, the governor brushed it aside as a media conspiracy: “I don’t really care what you think. Of course you agree with him, because you’re in the same business with him.” Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Current Issue View our current issue
The whole show ended with Cuomo standing behind the dais shouting at the entire room, “New Yorkers are doing a great job, and don’t demean them. It’s disrespectful to New Yorkers!”
Or maybe just the one?
Cuomo undeniably offered a vision of competent, humane government at the height of the crisis, but this is who he is the rest of the time. It’s why he and his staff reflexively insult anyone who criticizes his handling of the pandemic or insists on returning to the normal system of democratic governance as Jefferson envisioned it. People like the relentlessly honest Bill Hammond from the Empire Center for Public Policy, who’s currently suing the administration to force it to disclose the real number of Covid-related nursing home deaths (“yet another publicity stunt from an arm of the far-right advocacy industrial complex”). Or Assembly member Ron Kim for suggesting that the governor acted against the public interest in letting his state be one of the two that grant hospitals and nursing homes broad corporate immunity (“politically motivated”). Or Democratic and Republican lawmakers who want to curtail the governor’s emergency powers after granting them in March, and return to their role as a co-equal branch of government (“stupid” and “completely political”).
It all boils down to this: Any dissent is a partisan attack on our very lives, and Andrew Cuomo is our only hope. To solidify the narrative, he’s even written a self-congratulatory book at what he calls “half-time” in the crisis. Kind of like how every coach puts out a press release mid-game and Winston Churchill wrote the history of World War II in 1943. Oh, wait…
Indeed, St. Andrew, our savior of the spring, is now milking his 15 minutes of fame for an extra 30. That’s the problem with local reporters, who aren’t your sycophantic brother or the rest of the national media; they’re not here to powder your image. Say what you will about de Blasio, but he sits for twice-weekly interviews with Errol Louis on NY1 and Brian Lehrer on WNYC. New Yorkers know where to tune in to see their mayor submit to regular scrutiny and call in to ask direct questions. Cuomo’s desperately curated image is more than half the reason he’s the dominant player over the mayor, but he still can’t seem to keep his vanity in check. The book is an undignified victory lap by the facts-first persona that won him legitimate praise to begin with, underscoring the point that for Cuomo it was always more about presentation than substance. A reassuring performance made immortal by an actual performer, Maria DeCotis, in her pitch-perfect parodies.
The whole thing was already very Through the Looking Glass before the International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences announced on Friday that they were awarding the governor an Emmy for his “television shows with characters, plot lines, and stories of success and failure.” Next he’ll be playing himself in an Aaron Sorkin movie, taking three points off the back end. Aside from having just barely survived the delusion that elevated a reality TV character to the presidency, we’re now giving a real-life governor an entertainment award for doing his actual job. Where does that leave governors like Michigan’s Gretchen Witmer, who also gave press briefings, but didn’t take a bow—and got death threats instead?
There’s something genuinely depressing about seeing the son of a man who refused a seat on the Supreme Court so eager to be flattered by Ben Stiller. It’s almost hard to remember how he ridiculed two-time Emmy Award–winner Cynthia Nixon back in 2018 for being an unqualified celebrity.
Turns out he just wanted to trade places all along.


thenation--2020-11-26--Want to Be Like FDR, Joe Biden? Make Your Thanksgiving Proclamations Rallying Cries

Joe Biden framed his bid for the presidency with a pair of historically informed October campaign speeches in evocative locations .
Overlooking the battlefield at Gettysburg on October 6 , he recalled a Republican president who spoke of America ’ s better angels and promised in Lincolnian terms , “ I raise hope , not fear .
Peace , not violence .
Generosity , not greed .
And light , not darkness .
I ’ ll be a president who appeals to the best in us , not the worst.
” Then , on October 27 , he traveled to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spirit of the Democratic president who delivered a New Deal .
Recalling that Franklin Delano Roosevelt traveled to Warm Springs seeking treatment for the paralysis he suffered after being struck with polio at age 39 , Biden explained : Biden ’ s insight into the 32nd president was astute .
Roosevelt ’ s 1932 election came in the midst of a Great Depression , and at a time when the country had been rocked by public health crises and natural disasters .
He responded by embracing the power of the presidency to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come to be known as the New Deal .
As part of his crusade to advance that agenda , he seized the bully pulpit as a platform for guiding a divided nation toward bolder thinking about circumstances every bit as challenging as those the 46th president will wrestle with in a pandemic moment that has been devastating for workers , small-business owners , and family farmers .
If Biden is serious about “ Positioning Himself as a Modern FDR , ” he would do well to study how Roosevelt identified and utilized all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of solidarity and common purpose—even Thanksgiving Proclamations .
Rudy Giuliani Went to Court and Made a Compelling Argument—for His Own Disbarment Georgia GOP Senator Kelly Loeffler Just Got Caught Violating the Law Wisconsin ’ s Recount Will Only Serve to Confirm Donald Trump ’ s Humiliating Defeat Thanksgiving Proclamations have in various forms been issued by presidents since George Washington took office in 1789 .
In the early 20th century , they were perfunctory statements—as they are , for the most part , these days .
FDR adopted a bolder approach and Biden—who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the fight against Covid-19–should do the same .
Roosevelt ’ s proclamations , poetic in character , epic in scope , addressed an anguished people—offering recognition of their difficulties , understanding of their fears , and , above all , hope for the better day that might be forged through common cause .
The 32nd president was not afraid to make blunt statements about the corrosive role of greed in a society where bankers and investors had crashed the economy and left millions in misery .
This was the theme of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 21 , 1933 : May we ask guidance in more surely learning the ancient truth that greed and selfishness and striving for undue riches can never bring lasting happiness or good to the individual or to his neighbors .
May we be grateful for the passing of dark days ; for the new spirit of dependence one on another ; for the closer unity of all parts of our wide land ; for the greater friendship between employers and those who toil ; for a clearer knowledge by all nations that we seek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by all peoples to respect the lands and rights of their neighbors ; for the brighter day to which we can win through by seeking the help of God in a more unselfish striving for the common bettering of mankind .
This was a president who rejected the empty platitudes of “ up by the bootstraps ” rugged individualism and instead preached that the best response to economic uncertainty was with a citizenry united in common purpose .
It was a theme Roosevelt would return to annually as the 1930s progressed .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given courage and fortitude to meet the problems which have confronted us in our national life .
Our sense of social justice has deepened .
We have been given vision to make new provisions for human welfare and happiness , and in a spirit of mutual helpfulness we have cooperated to translate vision into reality , ” he wrote in 1934 , as the New Deal progressed .
“ More greatly have we turned our hearts and minds to things spiritual .
We can truly say , ‘ What profiteth it a nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose its own soul.
’ With gratitude in our hearts for what has already been achieved , may we , with the help of God , dedicate ourselves anew to work for the betterment of mankind… ” A year later , concerned by the rise of European fascism , Roosevelt was at his most poetic , writing : In traversing a period of national stress our country has been knit together in a closer fellowship of mutual interest and common purpose .
We can well be grateful that more and more of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the greater number .
We can be grateful that selfish purpose of personal gain , at our neighbor ’ s loss , less strongly asserts itself .
We can be grateful that peace at home is strengthened by our growing willingness to common counsel .
We can be grateful that our peace with other nations continues through recognition of our peaceful purpose .
But in our appreciation of the blessings that Divine Providence has bestowed upon us in America , we shall not rejoice as the Pharisee rejoiced .
War and strife @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must America by example and in practice help to bind the wounds of others , strive against disorder and aggression , encourage the lessening of distrust among peoples , and advance peaceful trade and friendship .
The future of many generations of mankind will be greatly guided by our acts in these present years .
We hew a new trail .
Throughout his presidency , FDR kept hewing that new trail .
During World War II , he spoke of the fight against totalitarianism , and the dream of a United Nations .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was new ground with statements decrying racial and ethnic divisions and promoting religious diversity .
Roosevelt ’ s proclamation for Thanksgiving Day 1941 appealed for “ the establishment on earth of freedom , brotherhood , and justice.
” In 1944 , which FDR referred to as “ this year of liberation , which has seen so many millions freed from tyrannical rule , ” the lifelong Episcopalian concluded his final Thanksgiving Proclamation with an interfaith appeal : “ Let every man of every creed go to his own version of the Scriptures for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eternal truths and majestic principles which have inspired such measure of true greatness as this nation has achieved.
” Having a president recognize and encourage the hewing of new trails , especially those that head in the direction of economic , social , and racial justice , may stir controversy .
There will always be those who prefer that presidents go the traditional route with proclamations and pronouncements .
But a new president who seeks to address the crises of these times must recognize the potential , and the power , for seizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deal vision for “ a more unselfish striving for the common bettering of mankind .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Joe Biden framed his bid for the presidency with a pair of historically informed October campaign speeches in evocative locations. Overlooking the battlefield at Gettysburg on October 6, he recalled a Republican president who spoke of America’s better angels and promised in Lincolnian terms, “I raise hope, not fear. Peace, not violence. Generosity, not greed. And light, not darkness. I’ll be a president who appeals to the best in us, not the worst.”
Then, on October 27, he traveled to Warm Springs, Ga., to summon the spirit of the Democratic president who delivered a New Deal. Recalling that Franklin Delano Roosevelt traveled to Warm Springs seeking treatment for the paralysis he suffered after being struck with polio at age 39, Biden explained:
FDR came looking for a cure, but it was the lessons he learned here that he used to lift a nation. Humility, empathy, courage, optimism. This place represented a way forward. A way of restoration, of resilience, of healing. In the years that followed, FDR would come back to Warm Springs often to think about how to heal the nation and the world, and that’s exactly what he did. Lifting us out of a great depression, defeating tyranny, saving democracy.
Biden’s insight into the 32nd president was astute. Roosevelt’s 1932 election came in the midst of a Great Depression, and at a time when the country had been rocked by public health crises and natural disasters. He responded by embracing the power of the presidency to implement the transformational policy agenda that would come to be known as the New Deal.
As part of his crusade to advance that agenda, he seized the bully pulpit as a platform for guiding a divided nation toward bolder thinking about circumstances every bit as challenging as those the 46th president will wrestle with in a pandemic moment that has been devastating for workers, small-business owners, and family farmers. If Biden is serious about “Positioning Himself as a Modern FDR,” he would do well to study how Roosevelt identified and utilized all available tools to promote a deeper sense of solidarity and common purpose—even Thanksgiving Proclamations. More From John Nichols A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness August 11, 2023 A Win for Abortion Rights, a Win for Democracy: Ohio Voters Reject Issue 1 August 9, 2023 The Biggest Threat to Donald Trump Could Be the Constitution Itself August 4, 2023
Thanksgiving Proclamations have in various forms been issued by presidents since George Washington took office in 1789. In the early 20th century, they were perfunctory statements—as they are, for the most part, these days. FDR adopted a bolder approach and Biden—who on Wednesday delivered a poignant Thanksgiving-eve statement on the fight against Covid-19–should do the same.
Roosevelt’s proclamations, poetic in character, epic in scope, addressed an anguished people—offering recognition of their difficulties, understanding of their fears, and, above all, hope for the better day that might be forged through common cause. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung
The 32nd president was not afraid to make blunt statements about the corrosive role of greed in a society where bankers and investors had crashed the economy and left millions in misery. This was the theme of his first Thanksgiving Proclamation, issued on November 21, 1933:
May we ask guidance in more surely learning the ancient truth that greed and selfishness and striving for undue riches can never bring lasting happiness or good to the individual or to his neighbors. May we be grateful for the passing of dark days; for the new spirit of dependence one on another; for the closer unity of all parts of our wide land; for the greater friendship between employers and those who toil; for a clearer knowledge by all nations that we seek no conquests and ask only honorable engagements by all peoples to respect the lands and rights of their neighbors; for the brighter day to which we can win through by seeking the help of God in a more unselfish striving for the common bettering of mankind.
This was a president who rejected the empty platitudes of “up by the bootstraps” rugged individualism and instead preached that the best response to economic uncertainty was with a citizenry united in common purpose.
It was a theme Roosevelt would return to annually as the 1930s progressed.
“During the past year we have been given courage and fortitude to meet the problems which have confronted us in our national life. Our sense of social justice has deepened. We have been given vision to make new provisions for human welfare and happiness, and in a spirit of mutual helpfulness we have cooperated to translate vision into reality,” he wrote in 1934, as the New Deal progressed. “More greatly have we turned our hearts and minds to things spiritual. We can truly say, ‘What profiteth it a nation if it gain the whole world and lose its own soul.’ With gratitude in our hearts for what has already been achieved, may we, with the help of God, dedicate ourselves anew to work for the betterment of mankind…”
A year later, concerned by the rise of European fascism, Roosevelt was at his most poetic, writing:
In traversing a period of national stress our country has been knit together in a closer fellowship of mutual interest and common purpose. We can well be grateful that more and more of our people understand and seek the greater good of the greater number. We can be grateful that selfish purpose of personal gain, at our neighbor’s loss, less strongly asserts itself. We can be grateful that peace at home is strengthened by our growing willingness to common counsel. We can be grateful that our peace with other nations continues through recognition of our peaceful purpose. But in our appreciation of the blessings that Divine Providence has bestowed upon us in America, we shall not rejoice as the Pharisee rejoiced. War and strife still live in the world. Rather must America by example and in practice help to bind the wounds of others, strive against disorder and aggression, encourage the lessening of distrust among peoples, and advance peaceful trade and friendship. The future of many generations of mankind will be greatly guided by our acts in these present years. We hew a new trail.
Throughout his presidency, FDR kept hewing that new trail. During World War II, he spoke of the fight against totalitarianism, and the dream of a United Nations. He also broke what for his time was new ground with statements decrying racial and ethnic divisions and promoting religious diversity. Roosevelt’s proclamation for Thanksgiving Day 1941 appealed for “the establishment on earth of freedom, brotherhood, and justice.” In 1944, which FDR referred to as “this year of liberation, which has seen so many millions freed from tyrannical rule,” the lifelong Episcopalian concluded his final Thanksgiving Proclamation with an interfaith appeal: “Let every man of every creed go to his own version of the Scriptures for a renewed and strengthening contact with those eternal truths and majestic principles which have inspired such measure of true greatness as this nation has achieved.”
Having a president recognize and encourage the hewing of new trails, especially those that head in the direction of economic, social, and racial justice, may stir controversy. There will always be those who prefer that presidents go the traditional route with proclamations and pronouncements. But a new president who seeks to address the crises of these times must recognize the potential, and the power, for seizing each opening to advance a new New Deal vision for “a more unselfish striving for the common bettering of mankind.


thenation--2020-11-27--Don’t Cancel Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer!

Holiday specials , a staple of North American childhoods since the early 1960s , are increasingly falling victim to our fragmented media culture .
Just as the liturgical calendar gave structure to the lives of the medieval peasants , an equally ritualized TV schedule shaped a communal culture in the era of the cathode tube : The Ten Commandments for Easter , It ’ s the Great Pumpkin , Charlie Brown for Halloween , and then , after Thanksgiving , a slew of familiar shows and movies revisited every year : A Charlie Brown Christmas , Dr. Seuss ’ How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Snowman , It ’ s a Wonderful Life , and the many iterations of A Christmas Carol .
But television is giving way to Youtube and streaming , which makes for more privatized and asynchronous viewing : With everyone watching on their own electronic device and in their own time , the idea of a shared experience represented by TV specials seems anachronistic .
There is evidence , though , that communal viewing remains something people cherish and want to hold on to .
As PBS reports , “ Apple TV+ purchased the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the beloved Peanuts holiday specials .
That sparked an outcry from viewers who were accustomed to annually tuning in on network TV .
Apple offered each special to stream for free for a handful of days , but that didn ’ t stop online petitions from gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures.
” Bowing to public pressure , Apple agreed to allow PBS to air the specials ad-free .
This rollback of streaming culture is likely to be temporary .
Holiday specials will persist , but without the chronological framework of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these specials will become curated by parents , who will work from memories of what they enjoyed as young .
But memories are sometimes faulty and not everything that enjoys the hazy glow of nostalgia deserves preserving .
Writing in the December issue of The Atlantic , the astute cultural critic Caitlin Flanagan makes the case against one of the most beloved of the old specials in an article bluntly titled , “ Don ’ t Subject Your Kids to Rudolph.
” According to Flanagan , Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer ( a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Productions ) is too “ bleak ” and “ dark ” for children .
The Perils of Not Prosecuting Trump This critique has some justice to it .
Like other Rankin/Bass shows , Rudolph does veer toward the grotesque , with mean-spirited characters who bully and badger each other .
The titular hero is relentlessly belittled for being different , his red nose eliciting taunts and exclusion .
Santa ’ s workshop is run with a ruthlessness of a Victorian factory , with miserable elves dreaming of escape .
Toys that don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Island of Misfit Toys .
But many storytellers have found it useful to highlight grotesque and selfish behavior as a way of drawing a contrast to Christmas cheer .
It ’ s hardly an accident that Ebenezer Scrooge and the Grinch are at the heart of the Christmas canon .
Flanagan is fair-minded enough to acknowledge the artistic merits of the special .
She notes , “ The puppets were created in the Japanese animation studio of Tadahito Mochinaga , who traveled to a deer sanctuary in Nara to study and sketch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an artist in the studio , began to work .
The reindeer puppets had long legs , felt hides , and huge , anime eyes .
Snow is piled in drifts , the sky is a piercing blue , and everything has a solid , touchable quality.
” But her overall judgement is negative .
As a child , Rudolph gave her “ fretful anxiety , ” and as an adult it still leaves her cold .
Like many commentators before her , Flanagan notes that the special has a queer subtext @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times in 2019 , Jennifer Finney Boylan itemized the tipoffs : “ A fabulously blond elf who doesn ’ t like to make toys ?
A reindeer who is cast out by those who are supposed to love him , on account of an accident of birth ?
A whole island populated by outcasts ?
” All of this , wrote Boylan , made Rudolph , “ the queerest holiday special ever.
” For Boylan and many other queer writers , this is a reason to celebrating Rudolph .
But Flanagan sees the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : We are supposed to understand that blond , dreamy-eyed Hermey wants to be a dentist , not a toy maker .
( What he really wants to do , in my opinion , is join the drama club , but that might have been too much for NBC . )
Foreman Elf—who , come the revolution , will not be dealt with kindly—humiliates him repeatedly .
When Hermey tells him , tentatively , that he doesn ’ t want to make toys , Foreman Elf repeats the phrase in the “ sissy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down through the ages .
“ Shame on you !
” cry the other elves , further demoralizing Hermey .
Rudolph thinks it teaches children to be themselves , and maybe it does .
But it also teaches them how to taunt a boy who seems different .
This is a classic critical misreading whereby depicting an injustice is the same as giving sanction to it .
By this logic , Moby-Dick promotes violence toward animals and Othello is a license for spouse-killing .
In fact , several generation of queer children , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ felt an affinity for Rudolph because he learns to accept his difference and not yield to social pressure .
Along the way , he forms a fellowship with other outsiders and nonconformists .
To be sure , the show was made in a pre-Stonewall world and has some of the era ’ s creaky liberalism .
Rudolph ’ s difference is validated because it turns out to be socially useful ( the bright red nose helping Santa deliver presents in a storm ) .
Still , on an emotional level , the story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather shows the superiority of self-acceptance and appreciation of difference .
Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer is a lesser part of the Christmas canon .
It lacks the sweet melancholy of A Charlie Brown Christmas or the ferociously gleeful misanthropy of How the Grinch Stole Christmas .
Still , it deserves to remain an annual ritual .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Holiday specials, a staple of North American childhoods since the early 1960s, are increasingly falling victim to our fragmented media culture. Just as the liturgical calendar gave structure to the lives of the medieval peasants, an equally ritualized TV schedule shaped a communal culture in the era of the cathode tube: The Ten Commandments for Easter, It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown for Halloween, and then, after Thanksgiving, a slew of familiar shows and movies revisited every year: A Charlie Brown Christmas, Dr. Seuss’ How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Frosty the Snowman, It’s a Wonderful Life, and the many iterations of A Christmas Carol.
But television is giving way to Youtube and streaming, which makes for more privatized and asynchronous viewing: With everyone watching on their own electronic device and in their own time, the idea of a shared experience represented by TV specials seems anachronistic. There is evidence, though, that communal viewing remains something people cherish and want to hold on to. As PBS reports, “Apple TV+ purchased the Peanuts Thanksgiving and became the new home to the beloved Peanuts holiday specials. That sparked an outcry from viewers who were accustomed to annually tuning in on network TV. Apple offered each special to stream for free for a handful of days, but that didn’t stop online petitions from gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures.” Bowing to public pressure, Apple agreed to allow PBS to air the specials ad-free.
This rollback of streaming culture is likely to be temporary. Holiday specials will persist, but without the chronological framework of the TV schedule. Instead, the viewing of these specials will become curated by parents, who will work from memories of what they enjoyed as young. But memories are sometimes faulty and not everything that enjoys the hazy glow of nostalgia deserves preserving.
Writing in the December issue of The Atlantic, the astute cultural critic Caitlin Flanagan makes the case against one of the most beloved of the old specials in an article bluntly titled, “Don’t Subject Your Kids to Rudolph.” According to Flanagan, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer (a 1964 stop-motion animation special made by Rankin/Bass Productions) is too “bleak” and “dark” for children. More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
This critique has some justice to it. Like other Rankin/Bass shows, Rudolph does veer toward the grotesque, with mean-spirited characters who bully and badger each other. The titular hero is relentlessly belittled for being different, his red nose eliciting taunts and exclusion. Santa’s workshop is run with a ruthlessness of a Victorian factory, with miserable elves dreaming of escape. Toys that don’t fit the norm are exiled to the Island of Misfit Toys.
But many storytellers have found it useful to highlight grotesque and selfish behavior as a way of drawing a contrast to Christmas cheer. It’s hardly an accident that Ebenezer Scrooge and the Grinch are at the heart of the Christmas canon. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung
Flanagan is fair-minded enough to acknowledge the artistic merits of the special. She notes, “The puppets were created in the Japanese animation studio of Tadahito Mochinaga, who traveled to a deer sanctuary in Nara to study and sketch a herd of deer before Ichiro Komuro, an artist in the studio, began to work. The reindeer puppets had long legs, felt hides, and huge, anime eyes. Snow is piled in drifts, the sky is a piercing blue, and everything has a solid, touchable quality.” Current Issue View our current issue
But her overall judgement is negative. As a child, Rudolph gave her “fretful anxiety,” and as an adult it still leaves her cold.
Like many commentators before her, Flanagan notes that the special has a queer subtext. Writing in the The New York Times in 2019, Jennifer Finney Boylan itemized the tipoffs: “A fabulously blond elf who doesn’t like to make toys? A reindeer who is cast out by those who are supposed to love him, on account of an accident of birth? A whole island populated by outcasts?” All of this, wrote Boylan, made Rudolph, “the queerest holiday special ever.”
For Boylan and many other queer writers, this is a reason to celebrating Rudolph. But Flanagan sees the queer subtext as a sanction for homophobia:
We are supposed to understand that blond, dreamy-eyed Hermey wants to be a dentist, not a toy maker. (What he really wants to do, in my opinion, is join the drama club, but that might have been too much for NBC.) Foreman Elf—who, come the revolution, will not be dealt with kindly—humiliates him repeatedly. When Hermey tells him, tentatively, that he doesn’t want to make toys, Foreman Elf repeats the phrase in the “sissy” voice that has haunted gay boys down through the ages. “Shame on you!” cry the other elves, further demoralizing Hermey. Rudolph thinks it teaches children to be themselves, and maybe it does. But it also teaches them how to taunt a boy who seems different.
This is a classic critical misreading whereby depicting an injustice is the same as giving sanction to it. By this logic, Moby-Dick promotes violence toward animals and Othello is a license for spouse-killing. In fact, several generation of queer children, and outsiders of all stripes, have felt an affinity for Rudolph because he learns to accept his difference and not yield to social pressure. Along the way, he forms a fellowship with other outsiders and nonconformists.
To be sure, the show was made in a pre-Stonewall world and has some of the era’s creaky liberalism. Rudolph’s difference is validated because it turns out to be socially useful (the bright red nose helping Santa deliver presents in a storm). Still, on an emotional level, the story doesn’t affirm social norms but rather shows the superiority of self-acceptance and appreciation of difference.
Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer is a lesser part of the Christmas canon. It lacks the sweet melancholy of A Charlie Brown Christmas or the ferociously gleeful misanthropy of How the Grinch Stole Christmas. Still, it deserves to remain an annual ritual.


thenation--2020-11-27--Janet Yellen at Treasury Is One of Biden’s Best Appointments

Barring any shenanigans from the Senate , the new Biden administration will feature America ’ s first ever female Treasury secretary in 2021 .
It may not be Elizabeth Warren , but at least the nomination of Janet Yellen means that we shall break free—at least for a time—of the seemingly endless Wall Street/DC revolving door that has characterized recent appointments to this crucial position .
Yellen herself has extensive public policy experience , first as a governor of the Federal Reserve Boar from 1994 to 1997 , then as the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1999 .
More recently , she returned to the Fed under the Obama administration , where she broke another glass ceiling when she became its chair in 2014 .
In that sense , Biden ’ s nominee has a unique institutional understanding of the interrelationship between the Treasury and the nation ’ s central bank , which should vastly enhance policy coordination between the two at a time when it is desperately needed .
Still , applause for Yellen ’ s appointment comes with a few caveats .
There is no question that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gravity of the current crisis and the corresponding need to offer full fiscal support to avert a severe relapse in economic activity .
At times , however , she has unnecessarily fretted about the size of the national debt , as in 2017 when she indicated that the $ 20 trillion figure “ should keep people awake at night ” and consequently raised interest rates before the economy had fully recovered from the 2008 crisis .
Yes , US national government debt today has reached its highest level relative to GDP since World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time focused on deficit reduction ; they worried about winning the war .
By the same token , what should keep Yellen “ awake at night ” today is the prospect of decades of economic stagnation ( and yet more debt accumulation ) if fiscal policy is insufficiently supportive of growth because of attempts to reduce the deficit prematurely before the economy reaches takeoff trajectory .
Amid Trump ’ s Wreckage , Democrats Have New Opportunities—if They Seize Them Time for Democratic Deficit Hawks to Go the Way of the Dodo Likewise , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yellen has been disturbingly complacent regarding the underlying risks that the economy faced because of massive financial deregulation and poor regulatory supervision .
As recently as 2017 , she blithely expressed the view that there would be no new financial crisis “ in our lifetimes.
” While the Dodd-Frank financial reforms were better than nothing , it has become increasingly evident that the legislation failed to remedy the economy ’ s underlying financial instability .
Indeed , the very opacity of the Wall Street–created financial derivatives that are still allowed to exist ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make it easy to inflate asset values massively and evade proper regulatory oversight .
Contrast Yellen ’ s attitude to that of some of her regulatory counterparts , such as Brooksley Born , who as head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC ) in the 1990s presciently warned of the growing systemic risks in the economy , at a time when many ( including Yellen herself back in 1996 ) remained oblivious to them .
It is true that today ’ s challenging economic environment was not triggered by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 should not obscure the fact that our global financial system continues to be characterized by ongoing fraud epidemics of precisely the kind that drove the financial crisis in 2008 and beyond , and could well become evident again as second- and third-order impacts of the pandemic manifest themselves in the months ahead .
If anybody should be aware of this , it is Janet Yellen , as her husband , Nobel Laureate economist George Akerlof , has written for decades about fraud and the corresponding opportunities for corporate looting in an environment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fairness to Yellen , more recently she did show a willingness to drop the hammer on the big banks in a way that some of her predecessors eschewed .
In her final major action as head of the Fed in 2018 , for example , Yellen imposed serious sanctions against Wells Fargo for “ widespread consumer abuses ” ( in contrast to most of Obama ’ s monetary and financial regulatory appointees , many of whom displayed a marked lack of enthusiasm for punishing Wall Street wrongdoing in the wake of the 2008 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yellen ’ s views on fiscal policy will be key .
In this regard , the early omens are good : Two months ago , she warned that the economic recovery would be uneven and lackluster if Congress failed to offer additional fiscal support to fight unemployment and keep small businesses afloat .
Of particular significance , Yellen specifically noted that a lack of aid to state and local governments could hamper economic recovery .
This is a crucial insight , because falling sales- and income-tax revenues are currently prompting US state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the widespread loss of jobs and incomes .
Furthermore , as Yellen appreciates , it is the states , not the federal government , that will largely handle distribution of the vaccines and therefore will play a key role in mitigating the pandemic ’ s spread .
So ongoing fiscal support to them remains essential from both an economic and a public health perspective .
Equally significant ( and despite her previous role as head of the Fed ) , Yellen has recently accorded primacy to fiscal rather than monetary policy .
Monetary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cost of borrowing , is a more indirect—and therefore less effective—means of stimulating aggregate spending .
The effects are variable because , while borrowers face lower costs , those who earn interest income ( such as retirees ) have less purchasing power because of lower interest income .
Furthermore , in an economic environment characterized by pessimism about future returns on capital investment and a heightened risk of unemployment , corporations are unlikely to take on more debt to fund job-creating investment no matter how low the costs of borrowing might be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ largely the role of the Treasury , not the Federal Reserve , to step up via robust fiscal policy to directly address the deficiency of demand and investment .
Time is of the essence here , given the long-term damage already sustained in the economy .
Fortunately , Yellen gets this .
She recognizes the need to generate employment for tens of millions now out of work , using the fiscal powers of the Treasury to build the productive capacity for the economy ( to avoid future inflationary constraints as and when GDP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ At the same time , as a former head of the US central bank , she is in a unique position to understand the institutional dynamics and capacities of the Fed , thereby ensuring ample policy coordination between the two institutions .
Happily , she will derive significant support in this regard from the current Fed chairman , Jerome Powell , who has continued to agitate for additional fiscal policy support from Congress and the Treasury .
Furthermore , in contrast to Steve Mnuchin ( or indeed , anybody in the Trump administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ via a robust public health response is a necessary precondition for sustainable economic growth .
The ongoing manic-depressive cycle of opening and locking down with economic gyrations to match is not a sustainable strategy to facilitate long-term recovery .
So it is encouraging to see her specifically advocate a more widespread and nationally coordinated strategy on Covid-19 .
All in all , then , Yellen represents one of Biden ’ s more encouraging appointments .
She appears to understand that we can ’ t go back to the old ways of growth and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the old normal was a good normal .
Like the president-elect himself , Yellen must remain open to creatively addressing the economy ’ s long-term structural challenges unhampered by old shibboleths as she takes on the formidable task before her in the years ahead .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Barring any shenanigans from the Senate, the new Biden administration will feature America’s first ever female Treasury secretary in 2021. It may not be Elizabeth Warren, but at least the nomination of Janet Yellen means that we shall break free—at least for a time—of the seemingly endless Wall Street/DC revolving door that has characterized recent appointments to this crucial position.
Yellen herself has extensive public policy experience, first as a governor of the Federal Reserve Boar from 1994 to 1997, then as the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Bill Clinton from 1997 to 1999. More recently, she returned to the Fed under the Obama administration, where she broke another glass ceiling when she became its chair in 2014. In that sense, Biden’s nominee has a unique institutional understanding of the interrelationship between the Treasury and the nation’s central bank, which should vastly enhance policy coordination between the two at a time when it is desperately needed.
Still, applause for Yellen’s appointment comes with a few caveats. There is no question that the incoming Treasury secretary fully appreciates the gravity of the current crisis and the corresponding need to offer full fiscal support to avert a severe relapse in economic activity. At times, however, she has unnecessarily fretted about the size of the national debt, as in 2017 when she indicated that the $20 trillion figure “should keep people awake at night” and consequently raised interest rates before the economy had fully recovered from the 2008 crisis.
Yes, US national government debt today has reached its highest level relative to GDP since World War II, but nobody at that time focused on deficit reduction; they worried about winning the war. By the same token, what should keep Yellen “awake at night” today is the prospect of decades of economic stagnation (and yet more debt accumulation) if fiscal policy is insufficiently supportive of growth because of attempts to reduce the deficit prematurely before the economy reaches takeoff trajectory. More From Marshall Auerback Inflation Is Falling. So Why Are the Fiscal Austerians Back in the Headlines? Today 5:30 am Does Bitcoin’s Recent Crash Spell the Beginning of the End for Cryptocurrencies? May 27, 2021 It’s ‘Court Reform,’ Not Court Packing October 22, 2020
Likewise, at times in her accomplished career, Yellen has been disturbingly complacent regarding the underlying risks that the economy faced because of massive financial deregulation and poor regulatory supervision. As recently as 2017, she blithely expressed the view that there would be no new financial crisis “in our lifetimes.”
While the Dodd-Frank financial reforms were better than nothing, it has become increasingly evident that the legislation failed to remedy the economy’s underlying financial instability. Indeed, the very opacity of the Wall Street–created financial derivatives that are still allowed to exist (such as collateralized debt obligations) continue to make it easy to inflate asset values massively and evade proper regulatory oversight. Contrast Yellen’s attitude to that of some of her regulatory counterparts, such as Brooksley Born, who as head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in the 1990s presciently warned of the growing systemic risks in the economy, at a time when many (including Yellen herself back in 1996) remained oblivious to them. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung
It is true that today’s challenging economic environment was not triggered by a financial crisis per se. However, Covid-19 should not obscure the fact that our global financial system continues to be characterized by ongoing fraud epidemics of precisely the kind that drove the financial crisis in 2008 and beyond, and could well become evident again as second- and third-order impacts of the pandemic manifest themselves in the months ahead. If anybody should be aware of this, it is Janet Yellen, as her husband, Nobel Laureate economist George Akerlof, has written for decades about fraud and the corresponding opportunities for corporate looting in an environment characterized by lax financial regulation. Current Issue View our current issue
In fairness to Yellen, more recently she did show a willingness to drop the hammer on the big banks in a way that some of her predecessors eschewed. In her final major action as head of the Fed in 2018, for example, Yellen imposed serious sanctions against Wells Fargo for “widespread consumer abuses” (in contrast to most of Obama’s monetary and financial regulatory appointees, many of whom displayed a marked lack of enthusiasm for punishing Wall Street wrongdoing in the wake of the 2008 crisis).
As Treasury secretary, Yellen’s views on fiscal policy will be key. In this regard, the early omens are good: Two months ago, she warned that the economic recovery would be uneven and lackluster if Congress failed to offer additional fiscal support to fight unemployment and keep small businesses afloat. Of particular significance, Yellen specifically noted that a lack of aid to state and local governments could hamper economic recovery.
This is a crucial insight, because falling sales- and income-tax revenues are currently prompting US state and local governments to cut spending, compounding the widespread loss of jobs and incomes. Furthermore, as Yellen appreciates, it is the states, not the federal government, that will largely handle distribution of the vaccines and therefore will play a key role in mitigating the pandemic’s spread. So ongoing fiscal support to them remains essential from both an economic and a public health perspective.
Equally significant (and despite her previous role as head of the Fed), Yellen has recently accorded primacy to fiscal rather than monetary policy. Monetary policy, which largely operates by altering the cost of borrowing, is a more indirect—and therefore less effective—means of stimulating aggregate spending. The effects are variable because, while borrowers face lower costs, those who earn interest income (such as retirees) have less purchasing power because of lower interest income. Furthermore, in an economic environment characterized by pessimism about future returns on capital investment and a heightened risk of unemployment, corporations are unlikely to take on more debt to fund job-creating investment no matter how low the costs of borrowing might be. In such circumstances, it is largely the role of the Treasury, not the Federal Reserve, to step up via robust fiscal policy to directly address the deficiency of demand and investment. Time is of the essence here, given the long-term damage already sustained in the economy.
Fortunately, Yellen gets this. She recognizes the need to generate employment for tens of millions now out of work, using the fiscal powers of the Treasury to build the productive capacity for the economy (to avoid future inflationary constraints as and when GDP does recover to pre-Covid-19 levels). At the same time, as a former head of the US central bank, she is in a unique position to understand the institutional dynamics and capacities of the Fed, thereby ensuring ample policy coordination between the two institutions. Happily, she will derive significant support in this regard from the current Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, who has continued to agitate for additional fiscal policy support from Congress and the Treasury.
Furthermore, in contrast to Steve Mnuchin (or indeed, anybody in the Trump administration), Yellen understands that pandemic mitigation via a robust public health response is a necessary precondition for sustainable economic growth. The ongoing manic-depressive cycle of opening and locking down with economic gyrations to match is not a sustainable strategy to facilitate long-term recovery. So it is encouraging to see her specifically advocate a more widespread and nationally coordinated strategy on Covid-19.
All in all, then, Yellen represents one of Biden’s more encouraging appointments. She appears to understand that we can’t go back to the old ways of growth and must therefore resist the seductive idea that the old normal was a good normal. Like the president-elect himself, Yellen must remain open to creatively addressing the economy’s long-term structural challenges unhampered by old shibboleths as she takes on the formidable task before her in the years ahead.


thenation--2020-11-27--Desperation and Hope Amid the Wuhan Outbreak

On January 23 , the day the Chinese central government locked down Wuhan , the filmmaker Hao Wu flew from New York City to Shanghai to celebrate Lunar New Year with his parents .
Hundreds of miles away from the world ’ s first known Covid-19 outbreak , Shanghai residents were staying in .
Even without a formal lockdown , gatherings were canceled .
The city streets were empty .
It was like living in the movie Contagion , Wu recalled .
Like many Chinese at the time , Wu , a Chengdu native , fumed over the initial coverup @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dire situation .
In Wuhan , Covid-19 patients overwhelmed hospitals , and many who couldn ’ t get treated died in their homes .
After he returned to the United States in early February , Wu started talking to filmmakers in China , hoping to collaborate on a documentary about the crisis .
A month later , he found his codirectors , Weixi Chen and another journalist who chose to remain anonymous .
The pair had filmed inside Wuhan hospitals and shared their footage with Wu .
As spring wore on , coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skyrocket , and the pandemic strained already tense US-China relations .
Trump hurled racist epithets like “ Chinese Virus ” and “ kung flu.
” China pushed back , fueling nationalistic sentiments .
Given the travel restrictions in both countries , Wu gave up on his plan to return to China and sneak into Wuhan .
Fearing professional and personal repercussions , his codirectors considered dropping out from the collaboration .
But eventually , Wu convinced them to keep working with him .
The three directors assembled an incredible film , 76 Days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lockdown .
It bears witness to the chaos and order , death and birth , desperation and hope , suffering and compassion , farewells and reunions in the first days of the pandemic .
So far , many critics have celebrated the candid shots showing raw , complex emotions , while others have faulted the film for not denouncing the local officials who initially concealed the outbreak from the public .
The documentary is set to be released in virtual theaters across the United States on December 4 .
I spoke with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his film .
I shed a lot of tears while watching the film , but I also felt uplifted and hopeful at times .
There were light moments that really made me smile .
What was your first reaction when you saw the footage ?
When I saw the footage , that was the first time when I felt like Covid was real , and immediately I realized that this was rare .
Because I ’ d talked to filmmakers elsewhere , I was pretty sure they didn ’ t have footage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen anything like that on television outside of China .
SL : The outbreak in Wuhan evolved into a global pandemic , and starting March , Donald Trump publicly referred to Covid-19 as “ Chinese Virus.
” And China became defensive .
The pandemic by then had become politicized .
How did that affect your film ?
HW : Because of the geopolitical tensions , China was really tightening control of any mainstream news reporting .
I heard about filmmakers on the ground who were visited by state security agents .
So my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We can ’ t collaborate with you.
” I don ’ t know whether the government orchestrated this .
Maybe the government encouraged this—but my sense is that nationalistic Internet trolls in China grabbed on to the fact that Fang Fang ’ s book , Wuhan Diary , would be published in English first overseas .
And then they accused Fang Fang of trying to use the Wuhan tragic stories for personal gains , trying to sell out China ’ s stories to the West .
And Anonymous [ one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , afraid of how the government was going to treat unauthorized film production .
Secondly , he was afraid of Internet trolls going after him .
He works for a state news outlet ; the stakes are a lot higher .
So he stopped working with me .
SL : But he ’ d shared the footage with you .
Obviously , he wanted to get the story out ?
HW : Yes .
That was his original intention , the reason he filmed it .
I ’ d assured him that before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d definitely sign a legal agreement with him .
And he said , “ I don ’ t care about agreement .
Just take it.
” But then in late March , he was like , “ You can ’ t use the footage .
You ’ re going to get me in trouble.
” So basically , by the end of March , I had nothing .
I thought , “ Maybe I should just try to find out , first of all , if there ’ s a film in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and secondly , if there ’ s a film , maybe I can try to assemble a film quickly .
If I show them where I wanted to take the film , maybe they ’ d agree with me and license the footage to me.
” Once I showed my rough assembly to the two codirectors , they saw where I wanted to go with the film , which was in line with their own thinking about the stories they ’ d captured .
So they agreed to license their footage to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they , especially Anonymous , took pity on me because they saw how much I wanted to finish the film .
I ’ d spent months editing with no prior assurance from them about the license .
SL : You were angry at the Chinese government ’ s handling of the pandemic , and you thought of doing a story to uncover the delay in their response .
How did it end up being a documentary about health care workers and Covid patients ?
HW : In the beginning , I wanted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quickly , you realize that it ’ s easier to do an investigative print story because you can grant anonymity .
During Wuhan ’ s lockdown , it was difficult to travel from place to place .
With a camera , you were always attracting attention .
And also the people , if you found them , that means they ’ d already been known because they ’ d given interviews to the press , or maybe they were too afraid to talk on camera .
Bryan Washington on Fiction ‘ Outside the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Is ‘ a Stranger to Self-Examination ’ ‘ You Have to Listen to the Streets ’ : Rebel Diaz on Hip Hop and the Chilean Constitution We filmed two whistleblower doctors .
They were extensively interviewed by both the domestic press and international press .
So I was like , “ If I talk to these people , I ’ m just gon na be basically regurgitating what ’ s already been covered in the news media .
So what more can I bring to the understanding of this ?
” We interviewed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government because his father contracted Covid in the hospital and later passed away .
But we decided later not to use the three conservations .
One reason was that by the time we got access to them , it wasn ’ t great access .
The interviews were not compelling .
And then , secondly , by the time we reached the whistleblower doctors , it was almost late February , early March ; the hospital they work for was calm already .
There was no sense of urgency in the hospital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t jibe with the other footage from my codirectors , because their footage was so raw , so observational , so immediate that you feel like you were there .
The other footage didn ’ t fit stylistically .
SL : Did the way the US handled the pandemic affect your approach to the film at all ?
HW : As I saw the US , Italy , Spain , and the UK mismanaging the pandemic response , I started thinking , “ Wait , we were so angry at the Chinese government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced with the unknown and didn ’ t know the best way to respond to it.
” So in late March , early April , I still felt like China ’ s response was too draconian .
Through my codirectors in China , I was talking to cancer patients who couldn ’ t get cancer treatment because the hospitals were overwhelmed .
I was also trying to get access to AIDS patients who couldn ’ t get HIV medications .
These were the typical news stories that were coming out of China .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and thought to myself : “ What if what China ’ s doing is the right way to do it ?
” At the time , I wasn ’ t sure whether what China was doing was the right or wrong way .
I decided it was not the right time for me to put a lot of critical commentary in the film , because we were living through it .
It was too early ; that ’ s something we need to do maybe a year or two years from now when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did you decide on the main characters and the arc of the documentary ?
HW : When I started to edit , I was simply trying to tell a purely objective , observational piece .
But then as I was editing , I guess it was fitting to what emotional states I was living through at that time .
I was separated from my parents .
I didn ’ t know when they ’ d be able to see their grandchildren [ they both have late-stage cancer ] .
I was feeling guilty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to my grandpa [ who died in March ] .
I was confused about how to feel about all of this .
I read a lot about past pandemics , which made me feel sad .
In every pandemic , when people got scared , they tried to assign blame .
They found scapegoats .
They got angry at each other .
The ugliest side of humanity always came out .
So I guess for me , I was looking subconsciously for the little moments of kindness , of how people reach out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I needed that to live through that emotional state I was in at that moment .
SL : Did you second guess your choice of placing ordinary people front and center ?
HW : Once I finished this film , I did a test screening with some friends .
They were like , “ You know , China really had this under control .
And the medical workers really showed a lot of care to patients.
” Then I called my codirectors and asked , “ Is that true ?
Did it really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I didn ’ t want my piece to be a propaganda piece for the government .
My codirector told me , “ Yes , most of the medical teams on the front line did show a lot of care to their patients .
They were seriously fighting on the front line , like soldiers.
” So that made me feel more comfortable , because it was an accurate portrayal of what happened .
Protecting the Truth About the Coronavirus in China SL : So you were afraid that if you showed the kindness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , critics would say it ’ s not critical of the Chinese government .
At the same time , you were concerned this portrayal would be used as propaganda by the Chinese government .
How do you navigate the increasingly fraught US-China relationship as a Chinese American filmmaker who has one foot in the US and the other in China ?
HW : It is a dilemma .
I do feel that as a Chinese filmmaker , to touch anything about China right now is tricky .
If it ’ s too critical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ keep it outside of China .
I don ’ t intend to see the distribution of my film in China , so I don ’ t have to deal with the censors .
But Chinese intellectuals , the maozuo [ Maoist leftists ] , would accuse me of selling out China or trying to use the Western perspective to misconstrue what ’ s happening .
And then if you are not critical enough , people here would accuse me of something .
And so that ’ s part of the reason why I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Because for me , as a filmmaker , my job is to tell a human story .
I firmly belong to the camp that if you want to understand the world , you have to understand the human individuals first .
And any social or geopolitical power struggle should stay in the background .
I get the criticism [ of my film ] .
The only thing I will say is that , first of all , you can ’ t require me to be newsy .
That ’ s not the film @ @ @ @ @ @ @ secondly , I can ’ t control how you perceive my film .
I can only stay truthful to my own personal integrity and my own creative vision , and leave the judgment to the viewers .
SL : As a Chinese journalist covering China in the US , I ’ m often frustrated by that simplistic narrative about China .
It seems the mainstream audience ’ s expectation is such that if a story is about China , it has to be about the government or Party practices .
Does this frustrate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frustrates me .
Here in the US , we always think we know China because we know what the Party is doing or what the government ’ s doing .
But we really don ’ t know China , because we don ’ t know Chinese people .
We ’ re confusing these two things all the time .
And we have limited interest in understanding the people .
We tend to forget that the people on the ground have agency , within whatever social or political structure , to choose to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choose to report on each other or not report on each other .
I think the thing about othering is that we strip the entire population of agency .
I used to be really explicit and say , “ I just want to find a complex human story to dispel this tendency of paying little attention to people.
” But now I ’ ve realized you can not change how they view China .
But if you tell really strong human stories , you can move them .
That ’ s the power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will change their point of view on things .
So I ’ ve given up trying to have that as my stated goal .
The only thing we can do is to make our work even better .
SL : What do you want the audience to take away from 76 Days ?
HW : If my film can make Americans understand Chinese people more , [ I ’ ll call it a success ] .
Because those are the people I see every time I go back to China .
I don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party ] or government officials ; I meet people on the street .
Those people can be manipulative .
They can take advantage of you .
But they can also be kind .
So , if we can just remind people to be patient—when you ’ re watching this film , don ’ t come with preconceived notions—try to see Chinese people , you know , they can be as kind as people here .
I guess that ’ s all I can hope for .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
On January 23, the day the Chinese central government locked down Wuhan, the filmmaker Hao Wu flew from New York City to Shanghai to celebrate Lunar New Year with his parents. Hundreds of miles away from the world’s first known Covid-19 outbreak, Shanghai residents were staying in. Even without a formal lockdown, gatherings were canceled. The city streets were empty. It was like living in the movie Contagion, Wu recalled.
Like many Chinese at the time, Wu, a Chengdu native, fumed over the initial coverup of the coronavirus and agonized over the dire situation. In Wuhan, Covid-19 patients overwhelmed hospitals, and many who couldn’t get treated died in their homes. After he returned to the United States in early February, Wu started talking to filmmakers in China, hoping to collaborate on a documentary about the crisis. A month later, he found his codirectors, Weixi Chen and another journalist who chose to remain anonymous. The pair had filmed inside Wuhan hospitals and shared their footage with Wu.
As spring wore on, coronavirus cases in the United States began to skyrocket, and the pandemic strained already tense US-China relations. Trump hurled racist epithets like “Chinese Virus” and “kung flu.” China pushed back, fueling nationalistic sentiments. Given the travel restrictions in both countries, Wu gave up on his plan to return to China and sneak into Wuhan. Fearing professional and personal repercussions, his codirectors considered dropping out from the collaboration.
But eventually, Wu convinced them to keep working with him. The three directors assembled an incredible film, 76 Days, which takes audiences inside Wuhan during the lockdown. It bears witness to the chaos and order, death and birth, desperation and hope, suffering and compassion, farewells and reunions in the first days of the pandemic. So far, many critics have celebrated the candid shots showing raw, complex emotions, while others have faulted the film for not denouncing the local officials who initially concealed the outbreak from the public.
The documentary is set to be released in virtual theaters across the United States on December 4. I spoke with Hao Wu about the art and politics of his film.
—Shen Lu Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. My Homeland Is Being Ruled by Terror. The World Must Pay Attention. Manny Maung
Shen Lu: I shed a lot of tears while watching the film, but I also felt uplifted and hopeful at times. There were light moments that really made me smile. What was your first reaction when you saw the footage? Current Issue View our current issue
Hao Wu: When I saw the footage, that was the first time when I felt like Covid was real, and immediately I realized that this was rare. Because I’d talked to filmmakers elsewhere, I was pretty sure they didn’t have footage like that. I hadn’t seen anything like that on television outside of China.
SL: The outbreak in Wuhan evolved into a global pandemic, and starting March, Donald Trump publicly referred to Covid-19 as “Chinese Virus.” And China became defensive. The pandemic by then had become politicized. How did that affect your film?
HW: Because of the geopolitical tensions, China was really tightening control of any mainstream news reporting. I heard about filmmakers on the ground who were visited by state security agents. So my two codirectors were like, “No. We can’t collaborate with you.”
I don’t know whether the government orchestrated this. Maybe the government encouraged this—but my sense is that nationalistic Internet trolls in China grabbed on to the fact that Fang Fang’s book, Wuhan Diary, would be published in English first overseas. And then they accused Fang Fang of trying to use the Wuhan tragic stories for personal gains, trying to sell out China’s stories to the West. And Anonymous [one of the codirectors] was, first of all, afraid of how the government was going to treat unauthorized film production. Secondly, he was afraid of Internet trolls going after him. He works for a state news outlet; the stakes are a lot higher. So he stopped working with me.
SL: But he’d shared the footage with you. Obviously, he wanted to get the story out?
HW: Yes. That was his original intention, the reason he filmed it. I’d assured him that before I did anything with them, I’d definitely sign a legal agreement with him. And he said, “I don’t care about agreement. Just take it.” But then in late March, he was like, “You can’t use the footage. You’re going to get me in trouble.”
So basically, by the end of March, I had nothing. I thought, “Maybe I should just try to find out, first of all, if there’s a film in the footage they shared with me, and secondly, if there’s a film, maybe I can try to assemble a film quickly. If I show them where I wanted to take the film, maybe they’d agree with me and license the footage to me.”
Once I showed my rough assembly to the two codirectors, they saw where I wanted to go with the film, which was in line with their own thinking about the stories they’d captured. So they agreed to license their footage to me. I guess to some degree, they, especially Anonymous, took pity on me because they saw how much I wanted to finish the film. I’d spent months editing with no prior assurance from them about the license.
SL: You were angry at the Chinese government’s handling of the pandemic, and you thought of doing a story to uncover the delay in their response. How did it end up being a documentary about health care workers and Covid patients?
HW: In the beginning, I wanted to find out what happened. But really quickly, you realize that it’s easier to do an investigative print story because you can grant anonymity. During Wuhan’s lockdown, it was difficult to travel from place to place. With a camera, you were always attracting attention. And also the people, if you found them, that means they’d already been known because they’d given interviews to the press, or maybe they were too afraid to talk on camera. The Q&A Bryan Washington on Fiction ‘Outside the Bounds of Trauma’ Rosemarie Ho The Liberal Establishment Is ‘a Stranger to Self-Examination’ Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins ‘You Have to Listen to the Streets’: Rebel Diaz on Hip Hop and the Chilean Constitution Jack Delaney
We filmed two whistleblower doctors. They were extensively interviewed by both the domestic press and international press. So I was like, “If I talk to these people, I’m just gonna be basically regurgitating what’s already been covered in the news media. So what more can I bring to the understanding of this?” We interviewed a guy who was trying to sue the government because his father contracted Covid in the hospital and later passed away. But we decided later not to use the three conservations. One reason was that by the time we got access to them, it wasn’t great access. The interviews were not compelling. And then, secondly, by the time we reached the whistleblower doctors, it was almost late February, early March; the hospital they work for was calm already. There was no sense of urgency in the hospital anymore. Thirdly, it didn’t jibe with the other footage from my codirectors, because their footage was so raw, so observational, so immediate that you feel like you were there. The other footage didn’t fit stylistically.
SL: Did the way the US handled the pandemic affect your approach to the film at all?
HW: As I saw the US, Italy, Spain, and the UK mismanaging the pandemic response, I started thinking, “Wait, we were so angry at the Chinese government, but then all the governments were faced with the unknown and didn’t know the best way to respond to it.” So in late March, early April, I still felt like China’s response was too draconian. Through my codirectors in China, I was talking to cancer patients who couldn’t get cancer treatment because the hospitals were overwhelmed. I was also trying to get access to AIDS patients who couldn’t get HIV medications. These were the typical news stories that were coming out of China. But I was slowly becoming more suspicious and thought to myself: “What if what China’s doing is the right way to do it?” At the time, I wasn’t sure whether what China was doing was the right or wrong way. I decided it was not the right time for me to put a lot of critical commentary in the film, because we were living through it. It was too early; that’s something we need to do maybe a year or two years from now when we look back.
SL: How did you decide on the main characters and the arc of the documentary?
HW: When I started to edit, I was simply trying to tell a purely objective, observational piece. But then as I was editing, I guess it was fitting to what emotional states I was living through at that time. I was separated from my parents. I didn’t know when they’d be able to see their grandchildren [they both have late-stage cancer]. I was feeling guilty about not being able to say goodbye to my grandpa [who died in March]. I was confused about how to feel about all of this. I read a lot about past pandemics, which made me feel sad. In every pandemic, when people got scared, they tried to assign blame. They found scapegoats. They got angry at each other. The ugliest side of humanity always came out. So I guess for me, I was looking subconsciously for the little moments of kindness, of how people reach out to help each other. I guess I needed that to live through that emotional state I was in at that moment.
SL: Did you second guess your choice of placing ordinary people front and center?
HW: Once I finished this film, I did a test screening with some friends. They were like, “You know, China really had this under control. And the medical workers really showed a lot of care to patients.” Then I called my codirectors and asked, “Is that true? Did it really happen in the hospital?” Because I didn’t want my piece to be a propaganda piece for the government. My codirector told me, “Yes, most of the medical teams on the front line did show a lot of care to their patients. They were seriously fighting on the front line, like soldiers.” So that made me feel more comfortable, because it was an accurate portrayal of what happened. Related Article Protecting the Truth About the Coronavirus in China Nation contributor
SL: So you were afraid that if you showed the kindness and care of Chinese health care workers, critics would say it’s not critical of the Chinese government. At the same time, you were concerned this portrayal would be used as propaganda by the Chinese government. How do you navigate the increasingly fraught US-China relationship as a Chinese American filmmaker who has one foot in the US and the other in China?
HW: It is a dilemma. I do feel that as a Chinese filmmaker, to touch anything about China right now is tricky. If it’s too critical of China, the government censors will keep it outside of China. I don’t intend to see the distribution of my film in China, so I don’t have to deal with the censors. But Chinese intellectuals, the maozuo [Maoist leftists], would accuse me of selling out China or trying to use the Western perspective to misconstrue what’s happening. And then if you are not critical enough, people here would accuse me of something.
And so that’s part of the reason why I usually shy away from news topics. Because for me, as a filmmaker, my job is to tell a human story. I firmly belong to the camp that if you want to understand the world, you have to understand the human individuals first. And any social or geopolitical power struggle should stay in the background. I get the criticism [of my film]. The only thing I will say is that, first of all, you can’t require me to be newsy. That’s not the film I would like to make. And secondly, I can’t control how you perceive my film. I can only stay truthful to my own personal integrity and my own creative vision, and leave the judgment to the viewers.
SL: As a Chinese journalist covering China in the US, I’m often frustrated by that simplistic narrative about China. It seems the mainstream audience’s expectation is such that if a story is about China, it has to be about the government or Party practices. Does this frustrate you?
HW: Yes, it frustrates me. Here in the US, we always think we know China because we know what the Party is doing or what the government’s doing. But we really don’t know China, because we don’t know Chinese people. We’re confusing these two things all the time. And we have limited interest in understanding the people. We tend to forget that the people on the ground have agency, within whatever social or political structure, to choose to be nice to each other. They can choose to report on each other or not report on each other. I think the thing about othering is that we strip the entire population of agency.
I used to be really explicit and say, “I just want to find a complex human story to dispel this tendency of paying little attention to people.” But now I’ve realized you cannot change how they view China. But if you tell really strong human stories, you can move them. That’s the power of art. But I doubt they will change their point of view on things. So I’ve given up trying to have that as my stated goal. The only thing we can do is to make our work even better.
SL: What do you want the audience to take away from 76 Days?
HW: If my film can make Americans understand Chinese people more, [I’ll call it a success]. Because those are the people I see every time I go back to China. I don’t meet CCP [Chinese Communist Party] or government officials; I meet people on the street. Those people can be manipulative. They can take advantage of you. But they can also be kind. So, if we can just remind people to be patient—when you’re watching this film, don’t come with preconceived notions—try to see Chinese people, you know, they can be as kind as people here. I guess that’s all I can hope for.