vox--2020-06-11--Meet the Romney-Gary Johnson-Bloomberg voter who’s embracing Black Lives Matter

Last Tuesday , I tweeted out a photo of a truck parked in downtown Washington , DC , not far from the White House and the protests against police brutality and the killing of George Floyd that had engulfed the city .
It was the bumper stickers on the back of the Toyota Tacoma that made me do it .
They showed what seemed to be a political evolution of sorts , mirroring one that many Americans may be having in 2020 : from a 2000 sticker for John McCain ’ s failed presidential campaign to a sticker supporting Mitt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones supportive of then-Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson in 2016 and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2020 .
And in the middle , a handwritten sign stating “ Black Lives Matter.
” I had a lot of questions about this truck , some simple : Whose truck was it ?
Was the BLM-supportive sign real or just put there to fend off possible thieves ?
And some not so simple — how did this person get to this place ?
How did their politics change over time , and why ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 26-year-old Nathan , the owner of the truck , gave me the answers .
Nathan is a Korean-American self-described “ libertarian-leaning Republican ” who has never been a fan of the two-party system .
But President Donald Trump was something of a breaking point for him .
“ I have pretty much felt politically homeless since 2016 , ” he told me .
“ It ’ s been fucking internal screaming for almost four years.
” He ’ s a Texas-born 2016 Virginia Military Institute graduate whose job search in Washington has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had never attended a street protest before last week , but he told me that being in Lafayette Park when Park Police used tear gas and rubber bullets against protesters “ radicalized ” him .
“ I just had to fucking show up after that , ” he told me .
Now he ’ s attending anti-police brutality protests outside the White House every day .
Wearing a hard hat emblazoned with quotes from Mahatma Gandhi and Mr. Rogers , he carries a broom and dustpan and tidies the streets as he walks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protest to be a “ peaceful contribution.
” We spoke on Saturday before he headed back to the White House to protest .
This interview has been edited for length and clarity .
Nathan ’ s last name has been withheld to protect his privacy .
I moved around a lot .
Virginia is the longest I ’ ve lived anywhere .
My story : born in Plano , Texas , near Dallas , and I moved to Charlotte , North Carolina , [ then ] Seattle , Hong Kong , Denmark , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Emirates , and Vancouver , British Columbia .
I wanted to join the military .
So I asked my parents to send me to a military high school to see if military college was something I could hack .
I liked it .
And then I went to the Virginia Military Institute .
My life goal was to be an infantry officer , a cavalry scout officer , or an armor officer — so , like , a guy in a tank .
[ I got a ] medical disqualification and never got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a transport company ] in Pennsylvania ; life sucked , hated that .
Quit that job , went to get my shit together in Oregon , worked in a restaurant .
I was just cleaning dishes , cleaning tables .
[ At the time I thought , ] “ I got a degree from , I thought , a fairly reputable institution , now I ’ m doing this.
” I needed a calling .
I was always a libertarian-leaning Republican , still consider myself a Republican fighting within [ the party ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I voted for president in 2016 [ former New Mexico Gov .
Gary Johnson ] decided to run for Senate .
I was willing to just go for something that I thought had meaning .
And that felt like that was doing something worth doing .
I was willing to go for free and just live off my savings from [ the transport company ] .
But I got hired by an organization called Young Americans for Liberty , went out , knocked on doors , made a positive impression .
A few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working full time .
I had a blast , went , “ I ’ m going to try Congress.
” I don ’ t think I ’ m gon na reveal who I worked for , but I ended up being on the Hill for a while [ before I was ] let go .
And then two weeks later , coronavirus hit the US , and every job I applied for replied back with , “ We are no longer hiring.
” I did some side hustles online , managed to pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all happened .
Can we stand up and look at the back of your truck ?
I think a lot of folks were interested in that .
So you mentioned [ in our Twitter messages ] that John McCain was one of your heroes .
In 2008 , I watched [ the campaign ] and I was like , I like that guy .
The reason for the stickers is — what I do is I just [ think ] , who did I like all the years ?
’ Cause I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them up .
I found an original Ross Perot sticker .
I slapped on that one [ on my old truck ] .
And that one was just me rebelling against a two-party system .
I ’ m a guy who happened at that point to just vote Republican .
But I ’ ll vote for a Democrat — you know , who gets in shouldn ’ t fucking matter .
As far as I ’ m concerned , I ’ d like to see the destruction of the two-party system , frankly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liked his campaign against George Bush .
W , you know , I didn ’ t put him up [ on my truck ] .
I think in terms of a compassionate person , he definitely is .
But as far as I ’ m concerned , I think he should have been impeached for the Iraq War and leading us into that .
And then Romney was your first vote .
Yeah .
First vote in 2012 .
Him , [ Paul ] Ryan .
Those were the kind of Republicans I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sen. Mitt Romney marched in a protest in support of the Black Lives Matter movement .
In a direct message , Nathan asked me to add “ how extremely proud ( he is ) to see my man Mitt out today.
” ] Bipartisanship is not a dirty word to me .
[ Former House Speaker John Boehner ] didn ’ t do everything right .
But I liked that he was willing to try to get that grand bargain with Obama .
[ Some of my colleagues have debated Boehner ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ there ’ s ] 2016 , when I was chairman of the College Republicans at VMI , and that ’ s like the most conservative school you could be at .
And then the moment [ Donald Trump ] came down that escalator and talked about , you know , he ’ s sure some Mexican people are okay , I was like , “ No , I ’ m not .
I can ’ t. ” I wasn ’ t going to vote for Trump .
I couldn ’ t .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ So [ for 2020 , ] I made a custom “ Joe Walsh , I guess , fine ” sticker .
I had that up for a while and he dropped out .
Then there wasn ’ t a Republican primary .
I couldn ’ t vote .
I was like , I guess I can do [ Joe ] Biden .
But for a while , I thought I was staring down the apocalyptic scenario for me and a lot of moderates , of Trump versus Bernie Sanders .
And that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s why you were supportive of Mike Bloomberg ?
I mean , stop-and-frisk , you know , there ’ s plenty of shit I can say .
I was trying to pick between shooting myself in the fucking head and shooting myself in the foot , and that was an obvious preference for me .
And he [ Bloomberg ] had appeal ; he ’ s a moderate and a centrist .
And it looked like he was going to do it until Elizabeth Warren spanked him on live TV .
I have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s been fucking internal screaming for almost four years .
Do you think that this protest has given you a chance to get some of that out or speak out in some way ?
It feels nice to do something .
I ’ d tell people that if you care about shit , just bitching on Facebook ’ s not going to change anything ; go out there .
I guess trying to film and getting footage was my toe into it .
But here I am now , [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I mean , I ’ m still , I can vote for centrist Democrats , but I ’ m too right of center .
I ’ m definitely not progressive , but , I mean , there ’ s always overlap .
I ’ ve always thought that the militarization of police has been a bad idea .
The drug war has been catastrophic , as far as I can see .
I think if states want to legalize [ drugs ] , that ’ s up to them .
I wouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d even say psychedelics should be legal now .
But it was weird because when I was at VMI , to [ Republicans ] , I was a libertarian and then I worked with libertarians , and to them I was a statist cuck .
You probably get this if you ’ ve been paying attention to right-wing stuff , but every libertarian agrees on two things : that there ’ s only one libertarian and it ’ s them .
So what ’ s your plan for the rest of the day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ streets ; that ’ s it .
That ’ s how I choose to protest .
Trying to bring that energy .
Like yesterday , I filled maybe three trash bags .
Everyone ’ s self-organized ; it ’ s a beautiful thing .
I ’ m not far out enough where the people are saying abolish the police , I ’ m not there , there ’ s a lot of places that [ other protesters and I ] don ’ t overlap , but I ’ ve always thought where there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Which I think they should do in Congress .
So what ’ s your plan after this , after these protests ?
I ’ ve had five-year plans .
They ’ ve all blown up in my face .
I thought success at first was just chasing a fat paycheck .
But I ’ ve found out that doing this stuff out here , interacting with people , the activist stuff , was super rewarding .
This is rewarding , I ’ ve seen .
[ But ] I ’ m going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Last Tuesday, I tweeted out a photo of a truck parked in downtown Washington, DC, not far from the White House and the protests against police brutality and the killing of George Floyd that had engulfed the city.
It was the bumper stickers on the back of the Toyota Tacoma that made me do it. They showed what seemed to be a political evolution of sorts, mirroring one that many Americans may be having in 2020: from a 2000 sticker for John McCain’s failed presidential campaign to a sticker supporting Mitt Romney’s candidacy in 2012 to ones supportive of then-Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson in 2016 and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2020.
And in the middle, a handwritten sign stating “Black Lives Matter.”
I had a lot of questions about this truck, some simple: Whose truck was it? Was the BLM-supportive sign real or just put there to fend off possible thieves? And some not so simple — how did this person get to this place? How did their politics change over time, and why? Or did they?
I got home before the curfew but I passed this truck near 14th street and if this is you, please contact me. pic.twitter.com/r1zKD9990v — Jane Coaston (@cjane87) June 2, 2020
This week, 26-year-old Nathan, the owner of the truck, gave me the answers.
Nathan is a Korean-American self-described “libertarian-leaning Republican” who has never been a fan of the two-party system. But President Donald Trump was something of a breaking point for him.
“I have pretty much felt politically homeless since 2016,” he told me. “It’s been fucking internal screaming for almost four years.”
He’s a Texas-born 2016 Virginia Military Institute graduate whose job search in Washington has been stymied by the coronavirus pandemic. He had never attended a street protest before last week, but he told me that being in Lafayette Park when Park Police used tear gas and rubber bullets against protesters “radicalized” him. “I just had to fucking show up after that,” he told me.
Now he’s attending anti-police brutality protests outside the White House every day. Wearing a hard hat emblazoned with quotes from Mahatma Gandhi and Mr. Rogers, he carries a broom and dustpan and tidies the streets as he walks, because he wanted his form of protest to be a “peaceful contribution.”
We spoke on Saturday before he headed back to the White House to protest. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Nathan’s last name has been withheld to protect his privacy.
Nathan
I moved around a lot. Virginia is the longest I’ve lived anywhere. My story: born in Plano, Texas, near Dallas, and I moved to Charlotte, North Carolina, [then] Seattle, Hong Kong, Denmark, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, and Vancouver, British Columbia.
I wanted to join the military. So I asked my parents to send me to a military high school to see if military college was something I could hack. I liked it. And then I went to the Virginia Military Institute. My life goal was to be an infantry officer, a cavalry scout officer, or an armor officer — so, like, a guy in a tank.
[I got a] medical disqualification and never got to serve. I worked for [a transport company] in Pennsylvania; life sucked, hated that. Quit that job, went to get my shit together in Oregon, worked in a restaurant. I was just cleaning dishes, cleaning tables. [At the time I thought,] “I got a degree from, I thought, a fairly reputable institution, now I’m doing this.” I needed a calling.
I was always a libertarian-leaning Republican, still consider myself a Republican fighting within [the party]. So the son of a bitch I voted for president in 2016 [former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson] decided to run for Senate. I was willing to just go for something that I thought had meaning. And that felt like that was doing something worth doing. I was willing to go for free and just live off my savings from [the transport company]. But I got hired by an organization called Young Americans for Liberty, went out, knocked on doors, made a positive impression. A few months later, they invited me back working full time.
I had a blast, went, “I’m going to try Congress.” I don’t think I’m gonna reveal who I worked for, but I ended up being on the Hill for a while [before I was] let go. And then two weeks later, coronavirus hit the US, and every job I applied for replied back with, “We are no longer hiring.” I did some side hustles online, managed to pay rent that way. And then this all happened.
Jane Coaston
Can we stand up and look at the back of your truck? I think a lot of folks were interested in that. So you mentioned [in our Twitter messages] that John McCain was one of your heroes.
Nathan
In 2008, I watched [the campaign] and I was like, I like that guy. The reason for the stickers is — what I do is I just [think], who did I like all the years? ’Cause I’m just a fan. I put them up.
I found an original Ross Perot sticker. I slapped on that one [on my old truck]. And that one was just me rebelling against a two-party system. I’m a guy who happened at that point to just vote Republican. But I’ll vote for a Democrat — you know, who gets in shouldn’t fucking matter. As far as I’m concerned, I’d like to see the destruction of the two-party system, frankly.
But I liked McCain, I liked his campaign against George Bush. W, you know, I didn’t put him up [on my truck]. I think in terms of a compassionate person, he definitely is. But as far as I’m concerned, I think he should have been impeached for the Iraq War and leading us into that.
Jane Coaston
And then Romney was your first vote.
Nathan
Yeah. First vote in 2012. Him, [Paul] Ryan. Those were the kind of Republicans I really identified with.
[On Sunday, Sen. Mitt Romney marched in a protest in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. In a direct message, Nathan asked me to add “how extremely proud (he is) to see my man Mitt out today.”]
Bipartisanship is not a dirty word to me. [Former House Speaker John Boehner] didn’t do everything right. But I liked that he was willing to try to get that grand bargain with Obama. [Some of my colleagues have debated Boehner’s interest in bipartisanship.]
Then [there’s] 2016, when I was chairman of the College Republicans at VMI, and that’s like the most conservative school you could be at. And then the moment [Donald Trump] came down that escalator and talked about, you know, he’s sure some Mexican people are okay, I was like, “No, I’m not. I can’t.” I wasn’t going to vote for Trump. I couldn’t.
And we all know what happened. So [for 2020,] I made a custom “Joe Walsh, I guess, fine” sticker. I had that up for a while and he dropped out. Then there wasn’t a Republican primary. I couldn’t vote. I was like, I guess I can do [Joe] Biden. But for a while, I thought I was staring down the apocalyptic scenario for me and a lot of moderates, of Trump versus Bernie Sanders. And that was like my nightmare.
Jane Coaston
And that’s why you were supportive of Mike Bloomberg?
Nathan
I mean, stop-and-frisk, you know, there’s plenty of shit I can say. I was trying to pick between shooting myself in the fucking head and shooting myself in the foot, and that was an obvious preference for me. And he [Bloomberg] had appeal; he’s a moderate and a centrist. And it looked like he was going to do it until Elizabeth Warren spanked him on live TV.
I have pretty much felt politically homeless since 2016. It’s been fucking internal screaming for almost four years.
Jane Coaston
Do you think that this protest has given you a chance to get some of that out or speak out in some way?
Nathan
It feels nice to do something. I’d tell people that if you care about shit, just bitching on Facebook’s not going to change anything; go out there. I guess trying to film and getting footage was my toe into it.
But here I am now, [and] it’s odd. I mean, I’m still, I can vote for centrist Democrats, but I’m too right of center. I’m definitely not progressive, but, I mean, there’s always overlap. I’ve always thought that the militarization of police has been a bad idea. The drug war has been catastrophic, as far as I can see. I think if states want to legalize [drugs], that’s up to them. I wouldn’t do it, but I’d even say psychedelics should be legal now. But it was weird because when I was at VMI, to [Republicans], I was a libertarian and then I worked with libertarians, and to them I was a statist cuck. You probably get this if you’ve been paying attention to right-wing stuff, but every libertarian agrees on two things: that there’s only one libertarian and it’s them.
Jane Coaston
So what’s your plan for the rest of the day?
Nathan
All I do is clean the streets; that’s it. That’s how I choose to protest. Trying to bring that energy. Like yesterday, I filled maybe three trash bags.
Everyone’s self-organized; it’s a beautiful thing. I’m not far out enough where the people are saying abolish the police, I’m not there, there’s a lot of places that [other protesters and I] don’t overlap, but I’ve always thought where there’s overlap, why fight it? Which I think they should do in Congress.
Jane Coaston
So what’s your plan after this, after these protests?
Nathan
I’ve had five-year plans. They’ve all blown up in my face. I thought success at first was just chasing a fat paycheck. But I’ve found out that doing this stuff out here, interacting with people, the activist stuff, was super rewarding. This is rewarding, I’ve seen. [But] I’m going to start applying for work.


vox--2020-06-11--You don’t just watch a Spike Lee movie. You’re part of it.

Spike Lee does not let you simply watch his movies .
When Lee makes a film , he isn ’ t thinking of you as another passive body in a seat , munching on popcorn , being entertained by a story he ’ s cooked up .
Oh , he ’ ll entertain you , no doubt about that .
But when you watch a Spike Lee joint , you ’ re not allowed the luxury of objectivity .
Like it or not , you become part of the movie .
And it ’ s not just his pointedly apposite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lee ’ s films don ’ t scream , “ Now , more than ever !
” The word “ urgent ” is a critical bromide , but Lee lives outside the cliché .
He is , in content and in form , a true filmmaker of urgency .
Plenty of filmmakers aspire to be “ provocative , ” to make the audience feel uncomfortable and exhilarated all at once .
( For a recent example , consider The Hunt , a movie which , if it were an actual person , would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its Twitter bio as soon as someone got mad about it . )
But Lee has been landing jabs and uppercuts and sometimes even haymakers on his targets for decades .
He ’ s a provocateur who doesn ’ t need to tell you how provocative he — or , most importantly , his work — is .
Lee , who turned 63 in March , exploded onto the scene while he was still in graduate school .
His 1983 master ’ s thesis film Joe ’ s Bed-Stuy Barbershop : We Cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to play in Lincoln Center ’ s prestigious New Directors/New Films festival .
It went on to win a Student Academy Award .
In 1989 , Do the Right Thing was a bona fide sensation , netting the director an Oscar nomination and a berth in the canon of great American film directors .
It ’ s arguably the most indispensable movie about race and police violence from an American director — certainly among the top five — and it launched a career that ’ s littered with peaks and valleys , messes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work of Spike Lee .
His latest and 24th feature film is Da 5 Bloods , which follows on the heels of his first competitive Oscar win for 2018 ’ s BlacKkKlansman ’ s adapted screenplay .
Like that film , Da 5 Bloods leans into genre trappings ( this time , some cross between a war movie and a buddy comedy ) , but with a bent that ’ s all Lee .
On its surface , it ’ s a tale of four black Vietnam vets who return to the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ search of gold and their fallen buddy ’ s remains .
But Da 5 Bloods is also a fiery union of his fiercest themes — race , trauma , and power ’ s corrupting effect — with a particular interest in when past history and present reality start rhyming .
Starring Norm Lewis , Clarke Peters , Isiah Whitlock Jr. , Jonathan Majors , and a magnificent Delroy Lindo , Da 5 Bloods takes on myriad issues ( no one would ever accuse Spike Lee of aiming too low ) , starting with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of whom are black and who were left to live with the remnants of a pointless war long past when the rest of us had moved on .
They went to war , which was hell .
They came back to a hell of a different kind .
Lee weaves that strand of history into the broader canvas of the 1960s and ’ 70s , from the civil rights movement to the moon landing .
Then he extends it into today , all the way to the Black Lives Matter movement .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Willmott ( working from an initial draft by Danny Bilson and Paul De Meo ) never make the narrative lines too straight .
Lindo gives a staggering performance as Paul , whose traumas have turned him into a MAGA-hat-sporting spout of paranoia , to the discomfort of both his friends and his son , David ( Majors ) , a Morehouse alum who comes looking for his father after he returns to Vietnam .
That narrative choice alone means that Da 5 Bloods , while political to the bone , refuses to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ means to be black in America does not fit into tidy fables .
In Da 5 Bloods , Lee brings back many of his signature filmmaking moves that rope the audience into the story Watching Da 5 Bloods , I found myself frequently pinned to my couch , laughing at the acerbic and sometimes goofball humor , at least when I wasn ’ t biting my fist .
It ’ s a bloody , screwy , incendiary piece of work , and I loved it , especially when it goes flying off the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s also propulsively immersive ; I half expected someone to stick a fist through the screen and grab me .
In this way , Da 5 Bloods is like many of Lee ’ s films — willing to break the rules of fiction and nonfiction , of the separation between audience and movie with which moviegoers have been trained to watch films .
It ’ s startling , for instance , when a character on screen suddenly looks at you , addresses you , starts telling you what they ’ re thinking .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fiction that makes us think we ’ re looking through a window into an alternate reality wherein they don ’ t know we ’ re here — a one-way mirror , with us hidden from view .
But Spike Lee likes to have his characters look back and directly into the camera , to startle us with the realization that they perceive us as part of their world on screen .
They ’ re sharing something with us , sometimes by talking to us and sometimes just by casting a knowing glance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jackson ’ s roving one-man Greek chorus in Chi-Raq ( 2015 ) to youthful Troy giving us a knowing glance from the back seat of a car in Crooklyn ( 1994 ) .
In Da 2 Bloods , Lee again includes that sense of offscreen recognition in one particularly electrifying scene that ends with an upraised fist of power and protest .
Lee also refuses to submit to a barrier between fact and fiction .
Frequently , and especially in his more recent work ( including Da 5 Bloods ) , he splices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports and speeches and moments we previously experienced on screens , reminding us that what we saw was both real and framed , shot for our consumption .
Over time , history gets reduced to iconic images from newsreels and grainy pictures .
By putting them in the context of his movies , Lee revives them , putting his films into a context that ’ s both cinematic and far bigger than cinema alone .
And it ’ s not just news footage that ’ s part of this ; cinema is revised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BlacKkKlansman ended , startlingly , with images of white supremacists at 2017 ’ s “ Unite the Right ” rally in Charlottesville , Virginia , but it started with images from the highest-grossing film of all time , 1939 ’ s famously racist Gone With the Wind .
Sometimes his references to cinema are cheeky .
In his 2000 film Bamboozled , he adds a tiny scene of Malcolm X telling a crowd they ’ ve been “ bamboozled , ” except it ’ s not Malcolm ; it ’ s Denzel Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1992 film .
But he alludes to cinema more powerfully at the end of Bamboozled , when a black TV executive , fed up with his white boss ’ s propensity to cancel TV shows with positive depictions of black characters , pitches an outrageous show featuring black minstrels performing in blackface .
After using this uproarious , incredibly uncomfortable setup to probe the heart of racism in the American entertainment industry , and the guilt we all share , Bamboozled ends with a lengthy clip montage of minstrelsy stereotypes , mostly drawn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Golden Age .
This has been going on forever , Lee says , and the results were not restricted to what you saw on screen .
In Da 5 Bloods , Lee does this partly by playing with the image itself , borrowing from movies like Apocalypse Now to evoke a war that many of us have only experienced through a movie screen .
The aspect ratio of the film changes depending on where we are in the characters ’ mental space and existential journey , sliding from widescreen to narrow 16mm to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more grainy in “ older ” scenes even though the actors aren ’ t de-aged at all .
Remember , Lee says : This is only a movie .
But much of what we know of real life is through a movie .
The two have collapsed into one .
So much of what happens in Da 5 Bloods is emblematic of how Lee insists you engage with the film as a mindful participant , not just as a passive observer .
Most anyone would have to be purposefully obtuse not to recognize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and thus in the history it recounts , in the same way that BlacKkKlansman refuses to let the audience think that its events happened in the “ past.
” Characters talk to us .
Familiar figures from history appear on screen .
The fictional characters blur into reality .
And it feels very , very real .
Which is what Lee has always been after .
There ’ s an exuberant , angry sagacity to a Spike Lee joint , which is why even the messier ones , or the ones that leave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
His films live in the same world as the audience .
They collapse the boundaries between audience and image .
When you watch a man burn a cork and blacken his face in Bamboozled , you ’ re seeing an actor play a part , but you ’ re also really watching a black man put on blackface to perform in a movie .
When you ’ re listening to four old black men talk about being Americans , they ’ re actors playing characters , but they ’ re telling the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history is the actors ’ and the viewers ’ history , too .
When Lee dedicated Do the Right Thing to six victims of police violence in 1989 , it wasn ’ t a gesture : It was a prophecy .
He ’ s been watching closely .
And he won ’ t let us off the hook .
Correction : a previous version of this article identified Do the Right Thing as Lee ’ s second feature film .
It was his third professional feature .
Every day at Vox , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Spike Lee does not let you simply watch his movies. When Lee makes a film, he isn’t thinking of you as another passive body in a seat, munching on popcorn, being entertained by a story he’s cooked up. Oh, he’ll entertain you, no doubt about that. But when you watch a Spike Lee joint, you’re not allowed the luxury of objectivity. Like it or not, you become part of the movie.
And it’s not just his pointedly apposite subject matter that sucks you in. Lee’s films don’t scream, “Now, more than ever!” The word “urgent” is a critical bromide, but Lee lives outside the cliché. He is, in content and in form, a true filmmaker of urgency.
Plenty of filmmakers aspire to be “provocative,” to make the audience feel uncomfortable and exhilarated all at once. (For a recent example, consider The Hunt, a movie which, if it were an actual person, would have smugly added “provocateur” to its Twitter bio as soon as someone got mad about it.) But Lee has been landing jabs and uppercuts and sometimes even haymakers on his targets for decades. He’s a provocateur who doesn’t need to tell you how provocative he — or, most importantly, his work — is.
Lee, who turned 63 in March, exploded onto the scene while he was still in graduate school. His 1983 master’s thesis film Joe’s Bed-Stuy Barbershop: We Cut Heads was the first student film ever to play in Lincoln Center’s prestigious New Directors/New Films festival. It went on to win a Student Academy Award.
In 1989, Do the Right Thing was a bona fide sensation, netting the director an Oscar nomination and a berth in the canon of great American film directors. It’s arguably the most indispensable movie about race and police violence from an American director — certainly among the top five — and it launched a career that’s littered with peaks and valleys, messes and masterpieces, and always indubitably the work of Spike Lee.
His latest and 24th feature film is Da 5 Bloods, which follows on the heels of his first competitive Oscar win for 2018’s BlacKkKlansman’s adapted screenplay. Like that film, Da 5 Bloods leans into genre trappings (this time, some cross between a war movie and a buddy comedy), but with a bent that’s all Lee. On its surface, it’s a tale of four black Vietnam vets who return to the country decades after their tours of duty in search of gold and their fallen buddy’s remains. But Da 5 Bloods is also a fiery union of his fiercest themes — race, trauma, and power’s corrupting effect — with a particular interest in when past history and present reality start rhyming.
Starring Norm Lewis, Clarke Peters, Isiah Whitlock Jr., Jonathan Majors, and a magnificent Delroy Lindo, Da 5 Bloods takes on myriad issues (no one would ever accuse Spike Lee of aiming too low), starting with the Vietnam veterans, a sharply disproportionate number of whom are black and who were left to live with the remnants of a pointless war long past when the rest of us had moved on. They went to war, which was hell. They came back to a hell of a different kind.
Lee weaves that strand of history into the broader canvas of the 1960s and ’70s, from the civil rights movement to the moon landing. Then he extends it into today, all the way to the Black Lives Matter movement.
But Lee and his BlacKkKlansman co-writer Kevin Willmott (working from an initial draft by Danny Bilson and Paul De Meo) never make the narrative lines too straight. Lindo gives a staggering performance as Paul, whose traumas have turned him into a MAGA-hat-sporting spout of paranoia, to the discomfort of both his friends and his son, David (Majors), a Morehouse alum who comes looking for his father after he returns to Vietnam. That narrative choice alone means that Da 5 Bloods, while political to the bone, refuses to be stuffed into partisan pigeonholes. What it means to be black in America does not fit into tidy fables.
In Da 5 Bloods, Lee brings back many of his signature filmmaking moves that rope the audience into the story
Watching Da 5 Bloods, I found myself frequently pinned to my couch, laughing at the acerbic and sometimes goofball humor, at least when I wasn’t biting my fist. It’s a bloody, screwy, incendiary piece of work, and I loved it, especially when it goes flying off the rails near the end.
It’s also propulsively immersive; I half expected someone to stick a fist through the screen and grab me. In this way, Da 5 Bloods is like many of Lee’s films — willing to break the rules of fiction and nonfiction, of the separation between audience and movie with which moviegoers have been trained to watch films.
It’s startling, for instance, when a character on screen suddenly looks at you, addresses you, starts telling you what they’re thinking. The screen is a fourth wall, a fiction that makes us think we’re looking through a window into an alternate reality wherein they don’t know we’re here — a one-way mirror, with us hidden from view. But Spike Lee likes to have his characters look back and directly into the camera, to startle us with the realization that they perceive us as part of their world on screen. They’re sharing something with us, sometimes by talking to us and sometimes just by casting a knowing glance, with examples ranging from Samuel L. Jackson’s roving one-man Greek chorus in Chi-Raq (2015) to youthful Troy giving us a knowing glance from the back seat of a car in Crooklyn (1994). In Da 5 Bloods, Lee again includes that sense of offscreen recognition in one particularly electrifying scene that ends with an upraised fist of power and protest.
Lee also refuses to submit to a barrier between fact and fiction. Frequently, and especially in his more recent work (including Da 5 Bloods), he splices together montages of archival footage, news reports and speeches and moments we previously experienced on screens, reminding us that what we saw was both real and framed, shot for our consumption. Over time, history gets reduced to iconic images from newsreels and grainy pictures. By putting them in the context of his movies, Lee revives them, putting his films into a context that’s both cinematic and far bigger than cinema alone.
And it’s not just news footage that’s part of this; cinema is revised in his hands, as well. BlacKkKlansman ended, startlingly, with images of white supremacists at 2017’s “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, but it started with images from the highest-grossing film of all time, 1939’s famously racist Gone With the Wind.
Sometimes his references to cinema are cheeky. In his 2000 film Bamboozled, he adds a tiny scene of Malcolm X telling a crowd they’ve been “bamboozled,” except it’s not Malcolm; it’s Denzel Washington playing him in Lee’s own 1992 film. But he alludes to cinema more powerfully at the end of Bamboozled, when a black TV executive, fed up with his white boss’s propensity to cancel TV shows with positive depictions of black characters, pitches an outrageous show featuring black minstrels performing in blackface. After using this uproarious, incredibly uncomfortable setup to probe the heart of racism in the American entertainment industry, and the guilt we all share, Bamboozled ends with a lengthy clip montage of minstrelsy stereotypes, mostly drawn from early animation and Hollywood’s Golden Age. This has been going on forever, Lee says, and the results were not restricted to what you saw on screen.
In Da 5 Bloods, Lee does this partly by playing with the image itself, borrowing from movies like Apocalypse Now to evoke a war that many of us have only experienced through a movie screen. The aspect ratio of the film changes depending on where we are in the characters’ mental space and existential journey, sliding from widescreen to narrow 16mm to full frame, with the image becoming more grainy in “older” scenes even though the actors aren’t de-aged at all. Remember, Lee says: This is only a movie. But much of what we know of real life is through a movie. The two have collapsed into one.
So much of what happens in Da 5 Bloods is emblematic of how Lee insists you engage with the film as a mindful participant, not just as a passive observer. Most anyone would have to be purposefully obtuse not to recognize themselves somewhere in Da 5 Bloods, and thus in the history it recounts, in the same way that BlacKkKlansman refuses to let the audience think that its events happened in the “past.” Characters talk to us. Familiar figures from history appear on screen. The fictional characters blur into reality. And it feels very, very real.
Which is what Lee has always been after. There’s an exuberant, angry sagacity to a Spike Lee joint, which is why even the messier ones, or the ones that leave critics arguing, are always worth seeing. His films live in the same world as the audience. They collapse the boundaries between audience and image. When you watch a man burn a cork and blacken his face in Bamboozled, you’re seeing an actor play a part, but you’re also really watching a black man put on blackface to perform in a movie. When you’re listening to four old black men talk about being Americans, they’re actors playing characters, but they’re telling the truth, too. The characters’ history is the actors’ and the viewers’ history, too. When Lee dedicated Do the Right Thing to six victims of police violence in 1989, it wasn’t a gesture: It was a prophecy. He’s been watching closely. And he won’t let us off the hook.
Da 5 Bloods premieres on Netflix on June 12.
Correction: a previous version of this article identified Do the Right Thing as Lee’s second feature film. It was his third professional feature.


vox--2020-06-11--Black National Guard members express discomfort with quelling Black Lives Matter protesters

A number of public officials , retired military officers , and protesters were concerned with the Washington , DC , National Guard ’ s role in clearing Lafayette Square and suppressing protests in the nation ’ s capital last week for a presidential photo op .
So , too , were the Guard members themselves , according to new reports .
According to reporting from the New York Times , when asked to employ “ aggressive tactics ” against local civilians , “ black members of the D.C. Guard objected to turning on their neighbors.
” Some members of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taking part against the protests that they have kept it from family members , ” the Times ’ s Thomas Gibbons-Neff , Eric Schmitt , and Helene Cooper report : “ Typically , as the D.C. National Guard , we are viewed as the heroes , ” said another soldier , First Lt. Malik Jenkins-Bey , 42 , who was the acting commander of the 273rd Military Police Company during the first days of the protests .
But last week was different , he said .
“ It ’ s a very tough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to me and they ’ re saying , ‘ Hey sir , you know my cousin was up there yelling at me , that was my neighbor , my best friend from high school , ’ ” said Lieutenant Jenkins-Bey , who is African-American .
At a Sunday briefing , Maj. Gen. William Walker , commander of DC National Guard , elaborated on the conflicts the Guard members faced in suppressing protesters demonstrating against the killing of George Floyd and police brutality and racism more broadly .
“ I have some Guardsmen whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : ‘ What are you doing out here , aren ’ t you black ?
’ ” Walker said .
“ Of course , we ’ re all hurting .
The nation is hurting.
” Of the many harrowing scenes , the use of two National Guard helicopters to terrorize protesters stands out .
The choppers flew at low altitudes , blasting air out that sent activists running and knocking signs off of the sides of buildings .
The DC National Guard is now investigating .
“ The District of Columbia National Guard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the operational employment of DCNG helicopter assets in and around the District of Columbia on Monday , June 1 is underway , ” the Guard said in a statement released last week .
“ The investigation is looking into whether the aircraft in question flew at inappropriately low altitudes and whether they adhered to applicable safety standards and flying procedures while in flight.
” Beyond the specific intimidation tactics , many Guard members have issued complaints , feeling that they were asked to violate the Constitution ’ s First Amendment ’ s peaceful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Guard member told reporter Daniel Lippman that “ a lot of us are still struggling to process this , but in a lot of ways , I believe I saw civil rights being violated in order for a photo op , ” adding that that “ what I just saw goes against my oath ” .
External voices like New York Times Magazine writer Nikole Hannah-Jones have also critiqued the use of force against American citizens .
Hannah-Jones tweeted , “ Whew , I feel for our black servicemen being called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives , too .
The dual role we ’ ve always forced upon our black soldiers .
Fighting for democracy abroad while often being denied it at home.
” On Thursday , the president contradicted much of these claims as reported in the Times Politico and elsewhere , tweeting , “ Our great National Guard Troops who took care of the area around the White House could hardly believe how easy it was .
“ A walk in the park ” , one said .
The protesters , agitators , anarchists ( ANTIFA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ VERY easily by the Guard , D.C. Police , & S.S. GREAT JOB !
” Yet the military continues to distance itself from the president .
Also on Thursday , Trump ’ s top general apologized for visibly walking around the capitol on one of the nights in which the National Guard was called to help quell protests for Trump ’ s photo op .
“ I should not have been there , ” Gen. Mark A. Milley , the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff , said in a recorded video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ My presence in that moment and in that environment created a perception of the military involved in domestic politics.
” Every day at Vox , we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles , videos , and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

A number of public officials, retired military officers, and protesters were concerned with the Washington, DC, National Guard’s role in clearing Lafayette Square and suppressing protests in the nation’s capital last week for a presidential photo op. So, too, were the Guard members themselves, according to new reports.
According to reporting from the New York Times, when asked to employ “aggressive tactics” against local civilians, “black members of the D.C. Guard objected to turning on their neighbors.” Some members of the majority-minority force “were so ashamed in taking part against the protests that they have kept it from family members,” the Times’s Thomas Gibbons-Neff, Eric Schmitt, and Helene Cooper report:
“Typically, as the D.C. National Guard, we are viewed as the heroes,” said another soldier, First Lt. Malik Jenkins-Bey, 42, who was the acting commander of the 273rd Military Police Company during the first days of the protests. But last week was different, he said. “It’s a very tough conversation to have when a soldier turns to me and they’re saying, ‘Hey sir, you know my cousin was up there yelling at me, that was my neighbor, my best friend from high school,’” said Lieutenant Jenkins-Bey, who is African-American.
At a Sunday briefing, Maj. Gen. William Walker, commander of DC National Guard, elaborated on the conflicts the Guard members faced in suppressing protesters demonstrating against the killing of George Floyd and police brutality and racism more broadly.
“I have some Guardsmen whose family members came out and criticized them: ‘What are you doing out here, aren’t you black?’” Walker said. “Of course, we’re all hurting. The nation is hurting.”
Of the many harrowing scenes, the use of two National Guard helicopters to terrorize protesters stands out. The choppers flew at low altitudes, blasting air out that sent activists running and knocking signs off of the sides of buildings. The DC National Guard is now investigating.
“The District of Columbia National Guard investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding the operational employment of DCNG helicopter assets in and around the District of Columbia on Monday, June 1 is underway,” the Guard said in a statement released last week. “The investigation is looking into whether the aircraft in question flew at inappropriately low altitudes and whether they adhered to applicable safety standards and flying procedures while in flight.”
Beyond the specific intimidation tactics, many Guard members have issued complaints, feeling that they were asked to violate the Constitution’s First Amendment’s peaceful assembly rights.
In a Politico interview, a Guard member told reporter Daniel Lippman that “a lot of us are still struggling to process this, but in a lot of ways, I believe I saw civil rights being violated in order for a photo op,” adding that that “what I just saw goes against my oath”.
External voices like New York Times Magazine writer Nikole Hannah-Jones have also critiqued the use of force against American citizens. Hannah-Jones tweeted, “Whew, I feel for our black servicemen being called out to suppress protesters marching for THEIR lives, too. The dual role we’ve always forced upon our black soldiers. Fighting for democracy abroad while often being denied it at home.”
On Thursday, the president contradicted much of these claims as reported in the Times Politico and elsewhere, tweeting, “Our great National Guard Troops who took care of the area around the White House could hardly believe how easy it was. “A walk in the park”, one said. The protesters, agitators, anarchists (ANTIFA), and others, were handled VERY easily by the Guard, D.C. Police, & S.S. GREAT JOB!”
Yet the military continues to distance itself from the president. Also on Thursday, Trump’s top general apologized for visibly walking around the capitol on one of the nights in which the National Guard was called to help quell protests for Trump’s photo op.
“I should not have been there,” Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said in a recorded video commencement address to National Defense University. “My presence in that moment and in that environment created a perception of the military involved in domestic politics.”


vox--2020-06-11--Harry Potter and the Author Who Failed Us

Last weekend , as Harry Potter fans the world over were still reeling from the latest round of anti-trans comments made by author J.K. Rowling , I boxed up 21 years of my life .
Over the past few years , Rowling has made several statements that suggest a growing alliance with TERFism — trans-exclusionary radical feminism , or the belief that trans women aren ’ t women and that biological sex is the only factor that determines someone ’ s gender .
Many Harry Potter fans had previously voiced concerns that Rowling might be anti-trans , but despite their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ TERFism wasn ’ t widely discussed until December 2019 , when she suddenly tweeted in support of a British TERF at the center of a highly publicized court case .
Though Rowling was met with massive backlash at the time , she ’ s continued to double down on her views .
On June 6 , she appeared to openly belittle transgender people when she mocked a news headline about “ people who menstruate.
” “ I ’ m sure there used to be a word for those people .
Someone help me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
” Rowling tweeted , seeming to imply that all people who menstruate are women and that only people who menstruate are women .
Rowling ’ s comment deeply hurt many of her millions of fans — including me .
More importantly , it perpetuated the type of pernicious hate and misinformation that leads to trans women , especially teens and black trans women , becoming victims of sexual assault , violence , and hate crimes at an appallingly frequent rate .
And so , on Sunday night , I removed Rowling from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all 11 books in the Harry Potter series ( seven novels , plus three supplementary books and one play script ) ; The Casual Vacancy , her scathing satirical foray into “ adult ” literature ; and her four Robert Galbraith mysteries .
In boxing up those books , I metaphorically boxed up years of intense participation in the Harry Potter fandom , from writing fanfiction and going to conventions to moderating fan communities online and nurturing the friendships I made within them .
I still talk nearly every day to people I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since my earliest days there .
I resolved to compartmentalize my Harry Potter fandom identity as something over and done with , instead of thinking of it as a cornerstone of my identity .
Then on Wednesday , Rowling attempted to explain her stance on trans identity with a long essay full of harmful transphobic stereotypes .
It was a profoundly hurtful piece of writing , riddled with hand-wringing , groundless arguments about villainous trans women , outdated science , and exclusionary viewpoints .
Especially gutting was the essay ’ s self-centeredness ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal to reason , rooted in her own experience as a woman and an abuse survivor .
She asked for empathy and respect for her own experiences while showing none for her targets .
But even before she published it , to me at least , the damage had already been done .
I had officially ended a 20-year relationship and started to grieve .
Like many fans , I ’ ve spent years critiquing the many problems embedded in J.K. Rowling ’ s stories : their arguable racism , queerbaiting , lack @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the patriarchal structures she established in her intricately detailed Wizarding World .
( And if you think that the Harry Potter books are just children ’ s stories , not worthy of this kind of real-world framework or critique , consider that Harry Potter bred several generations of Democrats . )
Perhaps I should have reached my limit earlier ; I ’ m queer , I ’ m fat , I strive to be an ally to people of color .
But fiction is malleable — you can tell yourself that with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , contradictions , multiple interpretations .
Besides , many fans have spent years if not decades calling out the Harry Potter books for their shortcomings , and often actively transforming the world of Harry Potter into something better through fandom and its many offshoots , all while still loving it .
For my own part , I would have forgiven and overlooked most of Rowling ’ s fictional flaws and foibles — including the ugly moment of transphobia in her Robert Galbraith novel The Silkworm .
But it ’ s impossible to ignore @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they come from Rowling herself , a woman who ’ s doubled down on her transphobic statements after months of heartbroken fans of her work expressing how hurtful those statements are .
It doesn ’ t help that Rowling truly is targeting one of society ’ s most vulnerable communities : In 2017 , research found that a staggering 44 percent of trans teens in the US had seriously contemplated suicide , while more than half had experienced long periods of feeling sad or hopeless .
And that was before many of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their identity is a joke .
It ’ s the kind of statement that feels even more hurtful , even more raw and vicious , because Rowling clearly has access to information about the struggles trans and nonbinary people face when it comes to depression , homelessness , sexual assault , and hate crimes , yet she chooses to use her massive platform to further attack us anyway .
And maybe that ’ s the ultimate reason why Rowling ’ s latest comments were the final straw for me — it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Harry Potter fandom may be one of the most significant parts of my life , but an even more significant part of my life is that I ’ m nonbinary .
It took me a very long time to figure out I was genderqueer , and when it finally clicked , one of my biggest revelations was that I ’ d spent years mapping my own identity onto fictional characters without realizing it — above all , Tonks in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix .
I vividly remember the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I read the fifth Harry Potter book in 2003 and met Nymphadora Tonks , a shapeshifter with spiky pink hair , a punk-rock aesthetic , and an insistence on being called by her gender-neutral last name .
I was certain that Rowling had written a canonically genderfluid character .
Like millions of other Harry Potter fans who dared to project ourselves into the books , I was ultimately disappointed : By the end of the series , Tonks was a married , fully binary woman , softer and gentler , letting her husband @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a name she ’ d previously hated .
I have always wondered if Rowling set up Tonks to somehow be “ tamed ” in the later books , from her earlier nonbinary presentation in Order of the Phoenix , and I ’ ve always written it off as surely not conscious .
As a sickening byproduct of Rowling ’ s transphobic screed on Wednesday , I now realize I was actually right to have been wary all along .
Rowling argues in the essay for the scientifically flawed and emotionally abusive narrative that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their dysphoria , ” and uses herself as an example of a teen who felt “ mentally sexless ” before eventually — “ fortunately ” — growing out of feeling “ confused , dark , both sexual and non-sexual.
” I read this passage as a chilling , heartbreaking confirmation that Rowling wrote Tonks not as an affirmation , even a subconscious one , of trans identity , but as a conscious repudiation of it : She deliberately created Tonks as a dsyphoric individual so that the character could “ grow out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the transphobic narrative that gender dysphoria is a choice .
She consciously took the shapeshifting nonbinary character , who helped me figure out ( well into adulthood ) that I was genderqueer , and made her “ grow ” into being cisgender .
It ’ s hard to articulate how upsetting that realization is .
A few months before Order of the Phoenix was published in 2003 , I participated in a letter-writing project for Rowling .
I parked myself in a café one day and spent hours trying to convey everything I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my joy , fear , wariness , and hope for what the rest of the series would be , all in what turned out to be a nine-page , handwritten letter .
That day has always been a precious memory to me , and it feels unbelievably hollow to look back now and realize that while I ’ d entrusted so much of myself to the author , she had been plotting on some tiny level to erase me .
None of this changes what Tonks means to me .
She remains the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nature before I even fully understood it myself .
She ’ s the Tonks I created , not the one Rowling gave me — not the character who ended the books , but the Tonks who began them .
With Rowling herself , though , such a tidy conclusion is harder to draw .
Harry Potter fans can say we want to keep the Rowling we started the books with , not the one we have now , but that ’ s difficult : The Rowling we have now is still tweeting .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the artist can ever be fully successful when the artist is right there , reminding you that she intended for her art to reflect her prejudice all along .
I ’ ve thought , written about , and talked about cancel culture a lot over the past few years .
People often ask me if I think it really exists — if “ canceling ” someone can have any meaningful effect , or whether it ’ s entirely a performative stance .
But I think that question flattens cancel culture ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” someone can ’ t be about punishing one individual or ruining their career ; even if humanity could agree on what social crimes were worth punishing , no one wants to live in a world where you can be blacklisted from existence , like in that one episode of Black Mirror .
Instead , I think cancel culture is best treated like a collective decision to minimize the cultural influence a person and their work have moving forward .
This approach has already been applied to some 20th-century figures whose art is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of what remains problematic about it : White supremacists Ezra Pound and H.P .
Lovecraft , and the white supremacist film Birth of a Nation , are the clearest , most well-known examples , but society has also recalibrated the way we discuss more recent creators like Woody Allen and Michael Jackson .
In all of these controversial cases , the approach usually winds up being one of compromise : No one wants to lose Cthulhu or “ Thriller ” or Annie Hall , but we also can no longer talk about any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that they were created by bigots or predators .
With J.K. Rowling , we ’ ve reached that point nearly in real time .
Already , we can no longer talk about Harry Potter without foregrounding the prejudice lurking beneath the surface-level morality of Rowling ’ s stories .
Many aspects of Harry Potter are already up for debate and reevaluation .
The sad and messy truth is that Rowling ’ s transphobic comments may have ruined Harry Potter for many of its fans .
But Harry Potter is simply too big a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t believe anyone wants to mind-wipe Harry Potter ’ s existence from the world ; it means too much to too many of us .
( Let ’ s leave aside the nonsensical whatever of Rowling ’ s Fantastic Beasts films . )
But I also find myself bristling at the jokes that have invaded social media in the wake of Rowling ’ s comments — the ones fantasizing that the Harry Potter books magically appeared unto us with no author , or that they were written by someone else we like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead , but that idea is about reclaiming agency over our own interpretation of a text .
It paradoxically depends on the author having a proprietary interpretation of their own work — one that we can then reject .
That ’ s important , because despite its flaws , Harry Potter has influenced generations of kids to grow into progressives who then turned out to be more progressive than the books themselves and the woman who authored them .
The series embodies what people in fandom mean when we say that fandom is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into Hogwarts houses , sewed cosplay , wrote fanfic , played Quidditch , stanned Wizard Rock , swarmed stores for midnight book launches — they did all of that , not J.K. Rowling .
Their passion made Harry Potter into the cultural phenomenon it is today .
By repudiating Rowling ’ s anti-trans comments , millions of Harry Potter fans are also turning the series into a symbol of the power of a collective voice to drown out an individual one .
The power of fans ’ love and empathy for trans people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steady rejection of Rowling ’ s prejudice , is a potent , raw form of cancellation — one undertaken not out of a spirit of scorn and ostracism , but with something closer to real grief — and it deserves to be a part of the story of Harry Potter .
But if we can ’ t erase Rowling , what can we do instead ?
We can break up with her .
We can grieve , nurse our wounds , and be sad we loved someone who hurt us so badly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a relationship we outgrew — one that became toxic — and regretting the time we spent waiting for a problematic fave to change and grow .
We can give ourselves time to heal .
And we can consider accepting that the microaggressions we may have noticed in Rowling ’ s books themselves were , perhaps , warning signs obscured by a benevolent , liberal exterior .
Jo can keep the money , and Pottermore and Cormoran Strike , and definitely all of Fantastic Beasts .
She can keep the house elves who really @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stereotypes , Dolores Umbridge , Voldemort , the Dementors , and Rita Skeeter .
I ’ ll take Harry and Hermione and Ron and Draco , Luna and Neville and Dumbledore ’ s Army .
I ’ ll take Hogwarts and pumpkin pasties and butterbeer and Weasleys ’ Wizard Wheezes , and every other moment of magic and love this series has given me and countless others .
Trans and queer Harry Potter fans get to keep Tonks and Remus and Sirius Black and Charlie Weasley and Draco , because I say so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we make the rules .
J.K. Rowling lost custody over her kids and now we can spoil them , let them get tattoos , express themselves however they want , love whomever they want , transition if they want , practice as much radical empathy and anarchy as they want .
Harry Potter is Desi now .
Hermione Granger is black .
The Weasleys are Jewish .
Dumbledore ’ s Army is antifa .
They ’ re anything you want and need them to be , because they were always for you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t be reading or rereading Harry Potter any time soon .
I have endless Harry Potter fanfiction and novels written by Harry Potter fans who grew up to explore instead .
Above all , I have the Wizarding World that lives on in my heart — queer , genderqueer , deviant , diverse , and currently defunding the Aurors .
That ’ s the Harry Potter we all created together , without J.K. Rowling .
And we all know that ’ s the version that matters , in the end .
Every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ answer your most important questions and provide you , and our audience around the world , with information that has the power to save lives .
Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment : to empower you through understanding .
Vox ’ s work is reaching more people than ever , but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources — particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will enable our staff to continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires .
Please consider making a contribution to Vox today .

Last weekend, as Harry Potter fans the world over were still reeling from the latest round of anti-trans comments made by author J.K. Rowling, I boxed up 21 years of my life.
Over the past few years, Rowling has made several statements that suggest a growing alliance with TERFism — trans-exclusionary radical feminism, or the belief that trans women aren’t women and that biological sex is the only factor that determines someone’s gender. Many Harry Potter fans had previously voiced concerns that Rowling might be anti-trans, but despite their efforts, the author’s apparent TERFism wasn’t widely discussed until December 2019, when she suddenly tweeted in support of a British TERF at the center of a highly publicized court case.
Though Rowling was met with massive backlash at the time, she’s continued to express these views. On June 6, she appeared to openly belittle transgender people when she mocked a news headline about “people who menstruate.”
“I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Rowling tweeted, seeming to imply that all people who menstruate are women and that only people who menstruate are women.
Rowling’s comment deeply hurt many of her millions of fans — including me. More importantly, it perpetuated the type of pernicious hate and misinformation that leads to trans women, especially teens and black trans women, becoming victims of sexual assault, violence, and hate crimes at an appallingly frequent rate.
And so, on Sunday night, I removed Rowling from my bookshelf and stored her away: all 11 books in the Harry Potter series (seven novels, plus three supplementary books and one play script); The Casual Vacancy, her scathing satirical foray into “adult” literature; and her four Robert Galbraith mysteries. In boxing up those books, I metaphorically boxed up years of intense participation in the Harry Potter fandom, from writing fanfiction and going to conventions to moderating fan communities online and nurturing the friendships I made within them. I still talk nearly every day to people I’ve known in Harry Potter fandom since my earliest days there. I resolved to compartmentalize my Harry Potter fandom identity as something over and done with, instead of thinking of it as a cornerstone of my identity.
Then on Wednesday, Rowling attempted to explain her stance on trans identity with a long essay full of harmful transphobic stereotypes. It was a profoundly hurtful piece of writing, riddled with hand-wringing, groundless arguments about villainous trans women, outdated science, and exclusionary viewpoints. Especially gutting was the essay’s self-centeredness; Rowling masked obvious transphobia as a personal appeal to reason, rooted in her own experience as a woman and an abuse survivor. She asked for empathy and respect for her experiences while showing none for her targets.
But even before she published it, to me at least, the damage had already been done. I had officially ended a 21-year relationship and started to grieve.
Like many fans, I’ve spent years critiquing the many problems embedded in J.K. Rowling’s stories: their arguable racism, queerbaiting, lack of multiculturalism, fat-shaming, and upholding of the patriarchal structures she established in her intricately detailed Wizarding World. (And if you think that the Harry Potter books are just children’s stories, not worthy of this kind of real-world framework or critique, consider that Harry Potter bred several generations of Democrats.)
Perhaps I should have reached my limit earlier; I’m queer, I’m fat, I strive to be an ally to people of color. But fiction is malleable — you can tell yourself that with any given work, there are extenuating circumstances, contradictions, multiple interpretations. Besides, many fans have spent years if not decades calling out the Harry Potter books for their shortcomings, and often actively transforming the world of Harry Potter into something better through fandom and its many offshoots, all while still loving it.
For my own part, I would have forgiven and overlooked most of Rowling’s fictional flaws and foibles — including the ugly moment of transphobia in her Robert Galbraith novel The Silkworm. But it’s impossible to ignore direct and repeated examples of bigotry when they come from Rowling herself, a woman who’s continued to reiterate her transphobic statements after months of heartbroken fans of her work expressing how hurtful those statements are.
It doesn’t help that Rowling truly is targeting one of society’s most vulnerable communities: In 2017, research found that a staggering 44 percent of trans teens in the US had seriously contemplated suicide, while more than half had experienced long periods of feeling sad or hopeless. And that was before many of them found out that a beloved author thinks their identity is a joke. It’s the kind of statement that feels even more hurtful, even more raw and vicious, because Rowling clearly has access to information about the struggles trans and nonbinary people face when it comes to depression, homelessness, sexual assault, and hate crimes, yet she chooses to use her massive platform to further attack us anyway.
And maybe that’s the ultimate reason Rowling’s latest comments were the final straw for me — it’s just too personal. Because my time in Harry Potter fandom may be one of the most significant parts of my life, but an even more significant part of my life is that I’m nonbinary.
It took me a very long time to figure out I was genderqueer, and when it finally clicked, one of my biggest revelations was that I’d spent years mapping my own identity onto fictional characters without realizing it — above all, Tonks in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. I vividly remember the visceral excitement I felt the first time I read the fifth Harry Potter book in 2003 and met Nymphadora Tonks, a shapeshifter with spiky pink hair, a punk-rock aesthetic, and an insistence on being called by her gender-neutral last name. I was certain that Rowling had written a canonically genderfluid character. Like millions of other Harry Potter fans who dared to project ourselves into the books, I was ultimately disappointed: By the end of the series, Tonks was a married, fully binary woman, softer and gentler, letting her husband feminize her as “Dora” — a name she’d previously hated.
I have always wondered if Rowling set up Tonks to somehow be “tamed” in the later books, from her earlier nonbinary presentation in Order of the Phoenix, and I’ve always written it off as surely not conscious. One sickening byproduct of Rowling’s transphobic screed on Wednesday is that I now realize I was right to have been wary all along. Rowling argues in the essay for the scientifically flawed and emotionally abusive narrative that “gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoria,” and uses herself as an example of a teen who felt “mentally sexless” before eventually — “fortunately” — growing out of feeling “confused, dark, both sexual and non-sexual.”
I read this passage as a chilling, heartbreaking confirmation that Rowling wrote Tonks not as an affirmation, even a subconscious one, of trans identity, but as a conscious repudiation of it: She deliberately created Tonks as a dysphoric individual so that the character could “grow out of” her dysphoria, subtly perpetuating the transphobic narrative that gender dysphoria is a choice. She consciously created the shapeshifting nonbinary character who helped me figure out (well into adulthood) that I was genderqueer, and then made her “grow” into being cisgender.
It’s hard to articulate how upsetting that realization is. A few months before Order of the Phoenix was published in 2003, I participated in a letter-writing project for Rowling. I parked myself in a cafe one day and spent hours trying to convey everything I felt for Harry Potter — all of my joy, fear, wariness, and hope for what the rest of the series would be, all in what turned out to be a nine-page, handwritten letter. That day has always been a precious memory to me, and it feels unbelievably hollow to look back now and realize that while I’d entrusted so much of myself to the author, she had been plotting on some tiny level to erase me.
None of this changes what Tonks means to me. She remains the character who innately reflected my own nonbinary nature before I even fully understood it myself. She’s the Tonks I created, not the one Rowling gave me — not the character who ended the books, but the Tonks who began them.
With Rowling herself, though, such a tidy conclusion is harder to draw. Harry Potter fans can say we want to keep the Rowling we started the books with, not the one we have now, but that’s difficult: The Rowling we have now is still tweeting. And no effort to separate the art from the artist can ever be fully successful when the artist is right there, reminding you that she intended for her art to reflect her prejudice all along.
I’ve thought, written about, and talked about cancel culture a lot over the past few years. People often ask me if I think it really exists — if “canceling” someone can have any meaningful effect, or whether it’s entirely a performative stance. But I think that question flattens cancel culture’s power. To me, “canceling” someone can’t be about punishing one individual or ruining their career; even if humanity could agree on what social crimes were worth punishing, no one wants to live in a world where you can be blacklisted from existence, like in that one episode of Black Mirror.
Instead, I think cancel culture is best treated like a collective decision to minimize the cultural influence a person and their work have moving forward. This approach has already been applied to some 20th-century figures whose art is now almost always foregrounded within the context of what remains problematic about it: White supremacists Ezra Pound and H.P. Lovecraft, and the white supremacist film Birth of a Nation, are the clearest, most well-known examples, but society has also recalibrated the way we discuss more recent creators like Woody Allen and Michael Jackson. In all of these controversial cases, the approach usually winds up being one of compromise: No one wants to lose Cthulhu or “Thriller” or Annie Hall, but we also can no longer talk about any of those stories without making it clear that they were created by bigots or predators.
With J.K. Rowling, we’ve reached that point nearly in real time. Already, we can no longer talk about Harry Potter without foregrounding the prejudice lurking beneath the surface-level morality of Rowling’s stories. Many aspects of Harry Potter are already up for debate and reevaluation. The sad and messy truth is that Rowling’s transphobic comments may have ruined Harry Potter for many of its fans.
But Harry Potter is simply too big a cultural landmark to jettison. I don’t believe anyone wants to mind-wipe Harry Potter’s existence from the world; it means too much to too many of us. (Let’s leave aside the nonsensical whatever of Rowling’s Fantastic Beasts films.) But I also find myself bristling at the jokes that have invaded social media in the wake of Rowling’s comments — the ones fantasizing that the Harry Potter books magically appeared unto us with no author, or that they were written by someone else we like better. Sure, the author is dead, but that idea is about reclaiming agency over our own interpretation of a text. It paradoxically depends on the author having a proprietary interpretation of their own work — one that we can then reject.
That’s important, because despite its flaws, Harry Potter has influenced generations of kids to grow into progressives who then turned out to be more progressive than the books themselves and the woman who authored them. The series embodies what people in fandom mean when we say that fandom is transformative: The fans who sorted themselves into Hogwarts houses, sewed cosplay, wrote fanfic, played Quidditch, stanned Wizard Rock, swarmed stores for midnight book launches — they did all of that, not J.K. Rowling. Their passion made Harry Potter into the cultural phenomenon it is today.
By repudiating Rowling’s anti-trans comments, millions of Harry Potter fans are also turning the series into a symbol of the power of a collective voice to drown out an individual one. The power of fans’ love and empathy for trans people and other vulnerable communities, and their steady rejection of Rowling’s prejudice, is a potent, raw form of cancellation — one undertaken not out of a spirit of scorn and ostracism, but with something closer to real grief — and it deserves to be a part of the story of Harry Potter.
But if we can’t erase Rowling, what can we do instead? We can break up with her.
We can grieve, nurse our wounds, and be sad we loved someone who hurt us so badly. We can celebrate happier times while mourning a relationship we outgrew — one that became toxic — and regretting the time we spent waiting for a problematic fave to change and grow. We can give ourselves time to heal. And we can consider accepting that the microaggressions we may have noticed in Rowling’s books themselves were, perhaps, warning signs obscured by a benevolent, liberal exterior.
Jo can keep the money, and Pottermore and Cormoran Strike, and definitely all of Fantastic Beasts. She can keep the house elves who really love their enslavement, the anti-Semitic goblin stereotypes, Dolores Umbridge, Voldemort, the Dementors, and Rita Skeeter. I’ll take Harry and Hermione and Ron and Draco, Luna and Neville and Dumbledore’s Army. I’ll take Hogwarts and pumpkin pasties and butterbeer and Weasleys’ Wizard Wheezes, and every other moment of magic and love this series has given me and countless others.
Trans and queer Harry Potter fans get to keep Tonks and Remus and Sirius Black and Charlie Weasley and Draco, because I say so; Harry Potter is ours now, and we make the rules. J.K. Rowling lost custody over her kids and now we can spoil them, let them get tattoos, express themselves however they want, love whomever they want, transition if they want, practice as much radical empathy and anarchy as they want. Harry Potter is Desi now. Hermione Granger is black. The Weasleys are Jewish. Dumbledore’s Army is antifa. They’re anything you want and need them to be, because they were always for you.
As for me, I won’t be reading or rereading Harry Potter anytime soon. Instead, I have endless Harry Potter fanfiction and novels written by Harry Potter fans who grew up to create their own worlds. Above all, I have the Wizarding World that lives on in my heart — queer, genderqueer, deviant, diverse, and currently defunding the Aurors.
That’s the Harry Potter we all created together, without J.K. Rowling. And we all know that’s the version that matters, in the end.