johnnysjabs-blog

[johnnysjabs-blog]

Hillary and Her Cult of Personality

Hillary’s been making the rounds on the talk show circuit promoting her newest book, “What Happened,” and while I’ve been in South Florida isolated from 24-hour cable news (thanks Irma!), I am feeling a bit of FOMO reading the cited sound bites on my social media feeds.  To be clear, I am a politics junkie, not a die-hard Hillary fan.  But for anyone who has a passion for American politics, the fact that Mrs. Clinton published a book about her failed 2016 campaign is exciting news indeed.  Her breadth of experience in the White House, Senate, State Department, and on the campaign trail makes her a public figure very much worth this sort of attention.

I voted for her.  I’ll be up front about it rather than have you try to read through the lines here…  And I’m usually way more interested in discussing policy nuances and debating the merits of someone’s proposed agenda, but I think it’s important that I be up front about this.  Because while I admire her as a shrewd politician and a noble stateswoman, I was not a big fan of Hillary Clinton, the 2016 candidate for the Democratic Party.

She poses the title of her book as a rather candid question to us that I’m sure was painstaking for her to address.  What happened?  While she seems rather sincere in taking responsibility for her campaign’s shortcomings, she needs to address a few elephants in the room – her e-mails, James Comey, and Bernie Sanders.  What I am waiting to see is if she addresses the cult of personality that on one hand, emboldened some of her most fervent supporters, and on the other, left many would-be supporters like myself feeling, “meh…”

What do I mean by her cult of personality?  Well, there’s been absolutely no one like her in American politics.  She is sharp, aggressive, unapologetic about her values, and unabashed in her steam-roller style that has no mercy for her political opponents.  <Queue the militant feminists among us> “Well, would you be saying that if she were a man?” No, I wouldn’t.  And that’s the exact point.  She is a woman.  And the aura that was built around #ImWithHer was a misrepresentation of the implied female empowerment movement latent in her campaign.

Let’s be honest.  Some Democrats supported Clinton because they thought she finally deserved the coronation… Sorry, I meant nomination.  With Bernie’s campaign surprisingly attacking from the Left, ardent Hillary fans weren’t having it though.  Does anyone remember the profanity-laden “All-Caps Explosion of Feelings Regarding the Liberal Backlash Against Hillary Clinton” that circulated on social media in early 2016?  Or how about signs at anti-Trump rallies reading, “If Hillary won, I’d be having brunch right now.”  These are cringeworthy and, at-best, superficial understandings of what a Clinton presidency would have looked like.

I really didn’t care about her e-mails.  I think that right-wing pundits made a big deal out of it because they had nothing better to attack her with.  If they were so concerned with national security, they should have been just as fixated with Donald Trump’s ties to white nationalism and the possibility of Russian influence on our governance.  What I did care about though was the fact that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was accepting money from corporate donors and that the Clinton Foundation was accepting money from foreign governments.  And what a shame for her being that Bernie Sanders swore off the practice and still ran a solid campaign.

Speaking of Bernie, I’m kind of tired of being labeled by Hillary and her supporters as a “Bernie-bro.” On one hand I like the moniker, but on the other, coming from her, there is such a snide undertone that implies some sort of false sexism that motivated his supporters.  Wasn’t Susan Sarandon one of his most prominent endorsers?  I’ll get into why your argument is bullshit later on.  Just keep reading…

Anyways, for all the shit that Trump’s gotten for his ties to Russia, let’s talk about the Clinton sympathies for racist and apartheid politics in Israel that she has espoused for YEARS.  Does no one else see this as a problem?  Benjamin Netanyahu is basically the David Duke of Israel, and yet in an op-ed she authored in 2015 entitled, “How I Would Reaffirm Unbreakable Bond with Israel – and Benjamin Netanyahu,” she claims that violence on all sides must stop.  All sides… sound a bit Trumpian, huh?  So for my so-called feminist friends, when did it become okay to blame the victim?  I guess feminism, gay rights, and child advocacy are worthy causes until they protect Palestinians.  Is it okay for me to use the term “feminazi” just yet?

Let me not mince words – this is a BIG FUCKING DEAL and informs me, as an American voter, about a candidate’s inherit views on race relations, criminal justice, foreign policy, and the boldness of his or her leadership.  Jimmy Carter worked hard for justice in Palestine, albeit as a former president, but even Obama didn’t pretend like he was chummy with Bibi Netanyahu.  Hell, Israel is not a monolithic electorate!  There are swaths of Israelis and American Jews that think Netanyahu is not good for the security of the US or the Middle East.  The fact that Mrs. Clinton thought it was necessary to write that op-ed angered the hell out of me.  And the fact that my Hillary-supporting friends thought that my hesitation to vote for her was unwarranted drives me just as mad.

About 2 weeks before the election, I had a conversation with my Republican mother about who we were planning to vote for.  Trump was out of the question for me, but I was leaning towards Jill Stein.  And for the first time ever in my life, my mom encouraged me to vote for a specific candidate.  She was fully supporting Hillary Clinton – not as a liberal, not as a conservative, not as Hillary’s cult of personality... Just as a voter who was looking objectively at two candidates and deciding which deal was better for our country.  And it’s not just because my mom was (is) disgusted by Trump.  My mom was convinced that Hillary was well-qualified to lead the world.  In that conversation, I figured that maybe she was seeing something that I wasn’t. Mama’s words were enough, and so I went to the ballot voting for Hillary, but keeping in mind that the fight for social justice was absolutely not over.

Well here we are.  The fight for social justice is NOT over. But instead, we are trying to fight Trump’s tendencies towards white-washing this great country of ours. Look – Trump SUCKS ASS.  Literally.  You could probably find some tape in Moscow of him doing so with a Russian prostitute.  He is a detriment to our government, gets in the way of legislative processes, and is a very poor statesman with little negotiating capital.  He has a Republican majority and can’t get shit done.  As my old man would say, it’s like a eunuch in a whorehouse. Hillary would have gotten shit done. So by her addressing “what happened,” she is allowing an appropriate moment for America to have a national conversation about who we are and where we would like to go.

My heart broke for her when she lost, and despite having many disagreements with her, I think she is an asset for any political party and has a right to share her voice on American politics for as long as she desires.  She is STILL more seasoned than Donald Trump and can still bring about effective change in Washington and on Main Street.  Unfortunately, it’s just not in the White House.  Love her or hate her, she sure is fascinating.  Plus she’s about to make a shitload of money with that book.  Go get it Mrs. Clinton!

[johnnysjabs-blog]

Marketing Mayweather vs. McGregor

Well today’s the day. And what good is a blog entitled “Johnny’s Jabs” if I didn’t post something about the touted fight of the century taking place this evening?  Yes, my friends.  2017 is the year of the impossible: Donald Trump is president, Janet Jackson gave birth at age 50, and Conor McGregor is fighting Floyd Mayweather, Jr.  I apologize in advance if you are expecting some kind of Stephen A. Smith analysis on what to watch for as the fight goes down.  Admittedly, I am merely a fan of mixed martial arts, but from my limited perspective, I can tell you this: the most fascinating aspect of the fight is the fact that it is happening.

At the beginning of 2016, this fight would never have come to fruition.  Mayweather was freshly retired and McGregor was flying high off his 13-second win over Jose Aldo, Jr. to unify the UFC Featherweight Championship. Shortly after, the UFC began heavily promoting a fight between McGregor and Rafael dos Anjos for the Lightweight Championship, but only 10 days before the fight, dos Anjos had to pull out due to injury.  Instead, McGregor accepted to fight Nate Diaz in a 170-pound welterweight matchup.

While we all know that Nate Diaz had a clean submission victory over McGregor in this fight, I hear many in McGregor’s fan-girl army (believe me – they’re just as fierce as the Beyhive) give excuses that Diaz only won because he was way bigger and because of his superior ground fighting skills.  So let’s break it down.  While McGregor fights in the 145 and 155-pound divisions, his pre-cut fighting weight is around 170 pounds.  Thus, it would be safe to assume that he walked into the cage around this weight to fight Diaz.  Diaz, the lankier fighter, has fought his entire career in the 155-pound division. But to take on McGregor at welterweight, he was supposedly walking around anywhere between 180 and 200 pounds. However, when it comes to the actual fights, promoter Dana White will have you believe that Diaz walked into the cage at 190 pounds.  Diaz claims that he was no more than 173.  White’s interest lies in milking his cash cow.  Who do you want to believe?

And then there is the excuse that McGregor lost that first battle because Diaz is a master of Brazilian jiu-jitsu.  No, no, no, no… This one can’t be argued.  Nate Diaz did not win because of superior jiu-jitsu.  He actually won because of superior boxing.  Yes.  Go back and rewind the tape.  Sure, McGregor was landing shots in the first round.  But were they effective?  Diaz neutralized him with amazing boxing defense – even when he got hit, his slips were distant enough that he never absorbed the energy that McGregor was packing behind his fists.  Do you recall the look of befuddlement/exasperation on McGregor’s face when Diaz finally found his rhythm in the second round?  …so much so that McGregor shot for the takedown that eventually ended the fight in Diaz’s favor.  It wasn’t jiu-jitsu my friends.  It was superior boxing that gave Diaz the opportunity to use his ground game.

After that first fight with Diaz, the guys went at it again last August in an epic five round rematch that eventually saw McGregor winning by majority decision.  While I recall judging the fight at home in favor of Nate Diaz, McGregor’s tenacity earned my respect.  Behind all the trash talk and 3-piece suits is a kid from Ireland who uses mental strength and envisioning to deliver results in real life.

So once Episode II of the Diaz-McGregor Saga was over (they owe us Episode III), McGregor, who was yet to defend his unified Featherweight Championship, was booked to take on Eddie Alvarez for the Lightweight Championship in Madison Square Garden in November 2016.  And McGregor delivered.  He became the first UFC champion to hold two belts simultaneously in two divisions.  A feat worth respect that finally set the stage to promote the fight we are about to witness tonight.

Now with all his accomplishments in mixed martial arts, the greatest one has been his ability to market himself.  By now, McGregor’s star power has surpassed that of Ronda Rousey’s and is pretty much unrivaled by anyone else in the sport.  But while I don’t take anything away from what he’s done in the cage, I am still not convinced that his cage power is unrivaled by anyone else in the UFC. Maybe I’ll jump on the McGregor train once I see that he’s taken on the slew of contenders awaiting their title shots: Khabib Nurmagomedov, Tony Ferguson, Nate Diaz… heck, even Max Holloway who is the current Featherweight Champion deserves a rematch by now.

Now the fact that I wrote all of this about Conor McGregor without mentioning Floyd Mayweather, Jr. is a testament to the fact that I am way more versed in MMA than I am in boxing. But I very well understand how the sweet science can enhance a fighter’s skill.  As such, McGregor hopefuls should not underestimate the craft and ability of someone who is an expert in their discipline with 49 wins and no losses. But like I said, the mere fact that this fight is happening is very telling of the future of combat sports. While WWE has had a strong-hold on the term “sports entertainment,” Mayweather vs. McGregor is challenging this monopoly.  Win or lose, with a payday like the one he’s seeing tonight, McGregor is going to choose future battles in the UFC that make most sense for his pocket.

Despite all this, I don’t want to dampen the mood for anyone who is getting hyped up.  I get it – in order for us to get to where we are today, we’ve had to suspend reality and believe this narrative about Conor McGregor, a narrative that McGregor himself surely buys into: that he is unrivaled in MMA, that he never lost a fight by way of striking, that only the unorthodox flow, size, and speed of a mixed martial artist can put an end to Mayweather’s flawless streak.  Don’t get me wrong – ANYTHING can happen, especially with someone as mentally strong as McGregor.  But I’ll tell you this: if McGregor loses fast and shows that he never stood a chance against Mayweather, I promise that I will talk shit about him and Dana White for the rest of my life.  McGregor needs to show up tonight even if he loses.  Being solid competition for the likes of Mayweather is still a win for the Irishman.  

Now while I’ll hold my breath for another 83 years before I call this the fight of the century, I am only willing to concede that this might be the marketing scheme of the century.  Take my money, Dana White!  Welcome to the future folks!

[johnnysjabs-blog]

Understanding White Nationalism via… Guns N Roses?

<Record scratch>! Yeah, you’re probably wondering how the hell I make this shit up, right? Well, as an early millennial who grew up idolizing bad-boy hair metal, there was no way for me to escape the sweet sounds of 80s rock music and, naturally, Guns N Roses.  In fact, listening to “Sweet Child of Mine” reminds me of childhood memories… Where everything was as fresh as the bright blue sky.

Okay, okay, I’ll stop and get a little serious here.  Now while I’m familiar with GNR’s catalog, what caught me by surprise during the political turmoil that put a national spotlight on the alt-right movement in 2016 was how relevant a song of theirs was to the current zeitgeist in American politics.  If you dig through their discography, you’ll find an EP they released in 1988 entitled G N’ R Lies.  On that collection is a controversial song called “One in a Million.”

Now for the GNR fan who is reading this post, I know, I know – “One in a Million” is old news and the controversy that surrounded it is sooo MTV VJ era.  But I’ll argue this – almost 30 years later, we are a country evermore shaken by globalization.  And so as Axl Rose documented his sudden rise to superstardom, I ponder that “One in a Million” could be a microcosm for what middle America has begun to experience in today’s era.

Before I begin, I do want to acknowledge the sensitive subject matter I am about to address. These lyrics may be triggering to people of color, immigrants, LGBT folks, and yes – even police officers. My intention is not to re-open wounds of yesteryear, nor is my intention to judge or apologize for Axl Rose who is the only credited writer of the song.  I think the best way to look at it is simply as a historical record that can inform us of our world today.

Let’s begin with the microcosm that I mentioned earlier.  The song describes Axl Rose’s experience being that “one in a million” kid with a dream in Lafayette, Indiana who finally makes it out to Hollywood.  Once he finally does, the lyrics paint a picture of a strange world that he is newly interpreting given the mental and social frameworks of his past.  The comparison to today is that, similarly, the other 999,999 individuals in small-town Indiana are now living in a strange world exposed by social media, a globalized economy, and 24/7 news cycles.  As people attempt to interpret this new world, they must do so reconciling the frameworks of their past.  

In the first verse, Axl describes his first interactions in Los Angeles with both black Angelinos and police:

                          Police and n*****s, that’s right / Get out of my way

                          Don’t need to buy none of your / Gold chains today

                          I don’t need no bracelets / Clamped in front of my back

                          Just need my ticket; til then / Won’t you cut me some slack?

 Axl rather sharply juxtaposes black street vendors selling gold chains with police officers cuffing bracelets behind his back.  This type of imagery in 2017 immediately calls to conscience the Black vs. Blue Lives Matter narrative.  A culture dominated by white supremacy can easily answer why he would use a slur to take aim at blacks, but why does he also decide to take aim at police officers in the same breath?  

Well, when you consider that crime rates among low-income whites are similar to those of low-income blacks, then Axl’s hostility towards police officers does begin to make sense. And if we go even further and extrapolate that low-income whites are more prone to developing racist and xenophobic attitudes (e.g.: “a black [or Mexican] person took my job because of affirmative action [or cheap labor]”), then we can say that white nationalists may exhibit the same hostility and distrust towards police that Axl describes here. I mean why else do white nationalists take pride in their armed militias?

The second verse sees Axl fully rejecting what was surely alien to him in Lafayette, Indiana – non-English speaking immigrants and LGBT individuals:

                             Immigrants and f*****s / They make no sense to me

                            They come to our country / And think they’ll do as they please

                            Like start some mini-Iran / Or spread some fuckin’ disease

                           They talk so many goddamn ways / It’s all Greek to me

 These lyrics touch upon the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s where Axl takes the standard view of the times in equating LGBT individuals with the virus.  Even more, he goes on to put the blame on the community when stating that “they’ll do as they please.”  Now I’m almost certain that Lafayette in the 1970s and 80s wasn’t some midwestern mecca for gay culture, so I can only assume that Axl’s move to Los Angeles must have been eye-opening to say the least.

But despite the country making great progress in acceptance of LGBT individuals, those of us on the Left Coasts need to remember that “evolving views” are still probably in their early stages in other parts of the country.  In fact, even though rates of homosexuality are likely evenly distributed among all populations, we shouldn’t assume that gay culture is evenly distributed. And so while social media and non-stop news coverage covered the #loveislove narrative as well as Caitlyn Jenner’s very public transition, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that many in middle America continue to react with opposition.  We’re seeing this now with debates over public bathrooms in North Carolina and in Trump’s reversals of initiatives protecting LGBT individuals.

In the same breath that Axl uses an epithet for LGBT individuals, he also targets immigrants – specifically Iranian-Americans who have a sizeable population in the Los Angeles area. What the lyric touches upon is a common attitude that many xenophobes have, and that is, “People who come to America should avoid recreating any semblance of the country that they had left,” or as Axl poetically stated, “Like start some mini-Iran.”  He also shows disdain for those who don’t speak English – another common attitude, even adopted by our current president.

In 2017 America, xenophobia exhibits itself in many ways – most definitely in negative attitudes towards undocumented immigrants, but also most certainly in Islamophobia.  I’ll argue that xenophobia is so prevalent that you don’t even need to be a white nationalist to espouse those views.  Lord knows how many times I rolled my eyes listening to old white ladies explaining their fear of ISIS and Sharia law developing in Dearborn, Michigan (and for the record, you could look it up – it’s fake news… I’m totally rolling my eyes again).  But again, what is the common thread that I’m seeing here?  Social media exposes people to alien cultures, and non-stop news sensationalizes narratives of anti-otherness.

The final verse is very telling in how white nationalism can subtly creep its way into our culture without notice:

                          Radicals and racists / Don’t point your finger at me

                          I’m a small town white boy / Just tryin’ to make ends meet

                          Don’t need your religion / Don’t watch that much TV

                          Just makin’ my livin’, baby / Well that’s enough for me

What’s so interesting about this verse, is that despite using the ‘n’ word in the song, Axl ultimately does not self-identify as a racist. And I’ve heard this argument before – people who use the ‘n’ word to describe only a “certain type of black person.” He goes further in claiming his innocence stating that he’s “a small town white boy just tryin’ to make ends meet.” Truthfully, the song and the words that Axl Rose chooses are anything but innocent.  While the media narrative of white supremacy looks exactly like a song that disparages immigrants and uses slurs for blacks and gays, the true essence of white supremacy gets lost.  And that is this:

Without Axl Rose and the millions who grew up like him – poor, white, and struggling – buying into the narrative that the other – poor, black, and struggling – is the reason for their life’s grievances, a system of wealthy elitists thriving on this divide-and-conquer strategy would have no authority to rule the masses.  While I absolutely detest the message that “One in a Million” espouses, I consider that Axl, individually, is not to blame.  And despite what we feel about the appalling racism, homophobia, and xenophobia latent in its message, Axl Rose still goes down as one of the greatest front-men in all of rock and roll.  He just happened to be one of many millions like him.

[johnnysjabs-blog]

Drawing the Line

What has greatly fascinated me about Trump’s candidacy and now presidency is how we Americans have struggled with our sensibilities in reaction to his unorthodox style.  Amid the current media cycle regarding Charlottesville, we are yet again going through a moment of public condemnation where most Americans are saying that the president has gone too far.  But really, guys?  It was only THIS moment that prompted public outcry from the mainstream?  Wasn’t it enough when he equated Mexican immigrants with rapists?  Or when he implied that Megyn Kelly hounded him during a live debate because she might be menstruating?  Or his calling for a total ban on Muslims entering the United States?

If there is any public reaction that the current one reminds me of, it would be when live tape was revealed of Trump’s famous “grab them by the p****” comment. So, in comparison, let’s look at how it played out: harsh public condemnation, political figures distancing themselves from then-candidate Trump, the Twitterverse going crazy, Trump biting back, and then with one big political success (re: winning the election) … complete normalization, even by those who so fervently criticized him.

Why even bring this up?  Well while each crisis gives us more of a peak into Trump’s unhinged state of mind, he did absolutely nothing illegal.  Shameful and dishonest – yes, but this guy ran a campaign in such fashion, and if we think for a moment that shame will bring Trump down, we are wrong.  The only viable way to oust him from office and restore some semblance of order in the White House will be through the legal means embedded within our governmental and judicial institutions.  He is still only one big political win away from us swiping this embarrassing moment right under the rug again.  Say what you will about Trump – but the guy doesn’t give a shit that he hurt your feelings.  And as long as he can get away with it, he absolutely will.

But while we’re all on the topic, Trump is treading once again on racial sensibilities of the American psyche, and I think it’s important not only now, but to always be discussing race in America with our friends and neighbors.  I came across this graphic depicting a spectrum of racist actions in which a line is literally drawn at the point where the mainstream public’s sensibilities lie.  But take a closer look and ask yourself where you draw your own line. What about your friends and neighbors? What about politically and socially active groups like BLM or Indivisible?  What about your average Trump supporter who doesn’t identify as a racist?  What about your tiki torch-bearing Trump supporter?  What about Trump himself?

I think that a good understanding of where we draw our lines shows that no two American experiences are alike.  Let’s hope we can take the opportunity and learn from each other.