A Land without a Crucible: How to Appropriate Cultural Collapse

In Trump's America, liberals have been reduced to 1) begging for money from the government, blind to the military-industrial complex's willingness to give them as much or as little money to keep them occupied as long as defense expenditures grow (one dollar for you, ten dollars for me); and 2) antagonizing every different-minded man, woman, and child on their quest to save the country. 

Warren Hinckle's characterization of American liberals has never been more apt: in 1973, he called them "horror[s]" because of their tendencies towards "self-righteousness and self-importance." (Another Hinckle gem: asked why he worked in conservative bars frequented by police officers, he responded if anyone could find a good liberal bar, he'd visit one.) 

Today's liberals can tell you about the Gulf of Tonkin but not why such an incident would be allowed to occur, or why otherwise intelligent people would feel compelled to engage in such maneuvers. Some might know about "domino theory" but not why it--and laying down dead body after dead body--would be considered reasonable in light of all available intelligence. I've heard the best minds of my generation rail against biased media (aka propaganda) using the terms "collateral damage" and "cultural misappropriation" without irony, captaining the English language to advance misunderstandings down empty harbors. Modern-day radicals are more likely to go apoplectic over a friend's recycling habits than wedding diamonds that, even if not bloody, destroy the earth while tilting local economies into de facto slavery. (Yes, Australia has done well with mining--it's the lack of economic diversification without proper safeguards that's the issue.)

Banally, America's intellectual malaise isn't intentional, making it harder to identify villains and vanquish them. I recently attended a Berkeley, California event celebrating books and, one might assume, critical thinking. Yet, every interview was the equivalent of a slow pitch softball game (no offense to softball players, some of the toughest athletes out there), as if organizers believed their primary job was to ensure audience members wouldn't face foul balls of complexity. Lesson: never choose interviewers who are friends or colleagues of the speaker. There's a reason journalism exists (existed?) as a profession--to create independence and therefore more freedom to ask difficult questions. Perhaps sponsors believed if they weren't nice, speakers wouldn't return, but anyone incapable of discussing potential deficiencies in his or her ideas isn't worth inviting back. 

Another lesson: whether intentional or unintentional, the result is the same. (Bonus, on war: "What does it matter to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?") None of the book festival's inanity was by design, or rather, everything was done to maximize happiness and to promote ideas. (At least they didn't require people to submit questions on index cards or limit themselves to two minutes.) 

At one booth, I discovered a book selling for 17.95 USD available for 9.99 USD online and asked for a discount. The vendor said he couldn't compete with Amazon because "we can't lose money on every book we sell." I responded that after building the online infrastructure, including the delivery infrastructure (initially subsidized by consumers paying for shipping), Amazon and publishers were both making money pursuant to an agreed-upon price split. It's true Amazon's R&D expenditures and forays into new areas (e.g., a mobile phone) cause it to report losses, but Amazon is no longer losing money on most book sales, especially not on the Kindle. (It does take a loss on some books like Harry Potter but gains brand loyalty as a result of its discounts and events.) Hoping to engage on a difficult question, I wondered out loud how brick and mortar bookstores could compete in a modern capitalist economy. Devoid of ideas, the vendor shrugged his shoulders and gave me a curt goodbye as his final rebuttal. At no point did he reveal any shame in opening the conversation with a misrepresentation. If we are living in a post-truth society, the cause is our post-humility culture. 

Former NY mayor Michael Bloomberg in National Geographic.

At another event, cultural appropriation was mentioned negatively, inspiring a well-meaning African-American audience member to explain the issue was rooted in economics. Meanwhile, none of London's black or brown residents would think to complain about their city's most popular food, the colorful chicken tikka masala. (It's as if the British have bigger fish and chips to fry.) Unbeknownst to most Americans and Europeans surrounded by dozens of foreign restaurants is a real-life government conspiracy: stealing the best people and ideas from other countries by any means necessary. Such a plot has existed since humans realized it was easier to steal than to invent, to build, or even to maintain the infrastructure--both physical and abstract--necessary to accept change gracefully. 

Stealing and appropriation occur because they allow Country A to gain the benefits of Country B's inventions with as little displacement or sacrifice as possible--at least for Country A. Immigration, something I've heard liberals support, is literally cultural appropriation personified. Unless the goal is to build walls or ghettos--something I've heard liberals oppose--the main reason different people should enter your hamlet or megapolis is so you can discover the best they have to offer until you're the lovely country of Indonesia but without the pollution, traffic congestion, and banking crises. 

Any other philosophy means you support using people for labor without any meaningful exchange of ideas, something Immanuel Kant warned us about in 1781: "So act that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means." (I remember when liberals told us melting pots and mixing were good for society, then they told us they meant we should be like salad bowls (healthy, with distinct colors), and now I think they're saying we shouldn't mix at all unless everyone pays for every idea they stole. I can't predict the next iteration, but I suspect lasagna will be involved.) 

Why we are discussing imposing informal or formal rules on what people should do or say rather than a more equitable process to capture or spur innovation, I don't know. Such discourse would require complex knowledge of different disciplines, along with sustainable funding mechanisms for new ideas that protect the displaced. To this end, I just want to say one word to you. Just one word. Philosophy. There's a great future in it. Will you think about it?

© Matthew Rafat (2018)

"Our drones will never be called terrorists, and our guns will never defeat nationalism. We change the world by how we look at it." -- Pico Iyer 

Anthony Bourdain Speaks in Cupertino, CA (Flint Center)

I'm an Anthony Bourdain fan. (I've written about him before here.) Bourdain's unique blend of intelligence and devil-may-care attitude leads to searing, funny commentary on everything from poverty to Cinnabons. Bay Area residents were treated to a 45 minute Bourdain speech--an extended rant, really--on May 28, 2009. 

Wearing jeans and a sports jacket, Bourdain showed up on stage to wild cheers. He stayed near the podium in the middle of the stage, but never behind it. He didn't have an outline--he spoke from the gut until he ran out of things to say, and then took questions from the audience. 

Bourdain started off by saying he's a good example of what not to do or say, but his two saving graces are his curiosity and his willingness to concede when he's wrong. After that disclaimer, we were off to the races. Bourdain began lambasting Alice Waters and Berkeley residents, both of whom are known for favoring organic food. His point was that Alice Waters and affluent Berkeley residents can afford to buy organic and local food, which is more expensive than non-organic food. He suggested that real organic food is homegrown, and if Alice Waters wanted to promote organic food for the masses, she should show people how to grow food in backyard gardens. At one point, he asked, "Do you think that the people lining up around Popeye's Chicken for 99 cent day are there because the stuff tastes good? No! They're there because it's cheap!" 

Bourdain then talked about how we're fetishizing our food by focusing on ingredients rather than the actual process of cooking. At one point, he joked that by the time a waiter gets done explaining the food on his plate and where it comes from, he's already finished eating the "damn thing." He compared our focus on ingredients to exotic Japanese porn, by which he probably meant that the actors aren't participating in the spirit of the moment, but are behaving in a detached, grotesque manner. 

Although Bourdain admitted to shopping at Whole Foods, he said that these days, organic generally means luxury, and that's not a good development for cooking. After all, real culinary innovation happens when someone takes the table scraps and makes something good out of it. Bourdain said that "cooking" was really the slaves' way of making something good from their masters' table scraps. He had many examples of poverty leading to innovation, mentioning famous chefs and their background. At one point, he asked, "Do you think a rich person looked at a slimy snail on the ground and thought, 'That looks really good to eat?' Of course not! Some poor person was hungry and probably thought, 'If I put enough butter and garlic on that thing, maybe I can manage to choke it down.'"

This is one reason I love Bourdain--he keeps his audience grounded. He believes that innovation comes from starvation, and he reminds us that more often than not, a poor, unknown person is responsible for the food on our plates. (Bourdain believes "The engine of gastronomy is poverty.") You might even say Bourdain's motif is bringing cooking back to the barrio, which explains why he hates celebrity chefs (he's famous for ranting against Rachel Ray). Bourdain did have kind words for Julia Child, though. He said she became famous by demystifying French food and showing people that with some effort, they, too, could make French food.

Basically, to get on Bourdain's good side, you have to recognize the hard-working, innovative people who are responsible for much of our food. That's not to say that Bourdain praises poverty. He reminded us that poverty might look fun when we go on short vacations, but the people in those "bucolic" places want an SUV and satellite TV just like the rest of us. Bourdain didn't talk talk much about fixing poverty, but he wants us to remember who makes the food that goes on our tables. After all, it's not rich people who pick the tomatoes and slaughter the animals we end up eating. One of Bourdain's themes is to remind people that our food has a cost, and the cost is keeping lots of poor people in poverty so they can continue doing the dirty work for us. Bourdain then ranted against poor food choices, asking, "What the f*ck is a Cinnabon? It's got, like, a pound of sugar on it, and every time I'm in the airport, I have to deal with the smell overpowering all the other food choices." On a more serious note, Bourdain said we need to be more careful about what we're feeding our children. He said studies have shown if you put vegetables in a McDonald's wrapper, kids will eat it and say it tastes better than ordinary vegetables served on a plate. (Whoa.) He said he uses reverse psychology on his daughter, Ariane, bashing McDonald's every time he can, and telling his daughter that Ronald McDonald may be mentally-impaired. (Bourdain, being Bourdain, used different words.)

Bourdain also called vegetarians "rude." He said that food is the "purest expression of who we are," and when someone offers you something to eat, you shouldn't tell them, "That looks good, but can I have a spinach salad instead?"

Someone asked Bourdain to name his favorite food. Bourdain said his favorite comfort food is a Vietnamese pho bowl. (I agree!)

Another person asked which countries had the best culinary cultures. Bourdain mentioned Spain and had many kind words for the Spaniards. He also said if you were looking for a cheap, diverse selection of food, Singapore is where you want to be. (I agree! Singapore's food scene was one reason I fell in love with the country.)

Bourdain said he married into a North Italian family, and at home, his wife does much of the cooking. He said he married into the kind of family he always wanted--loud, boisterous, and open.

Bourdain says when he's at home, he's a stay-at-home dad; however, he travels 10 out of 12 months of the year.

Someone asked him about his worst travel experiences. Bourdain named Romania and Uzbekistan. He pilloried Romania's handling of his show, saying that the government did not allow him to go to the backroads to meet with the average residents. He started doing robot-like impersonations of the Romanian government officials on the trip while narrating, "Here is our version of classic Romanian culture..." Bourdain said that after he left, the Romanian papers started calling him a "KGB/Mossad" spy. (I can't wait to see that episode--Bourdain is hilarious when he's snarky.)

Speaking of bad experiences, Bourdain said that he knows his audience likes to see him miserable, but when he travels, he wants to have a good time. He doesn't want to speak badly of anyplace, so when he does become snarky, it's not something that's planned.

If you haven't seen Bourdain's show, "No Reservations" (on the Travel Channel), I highly recommend it. I still haven't read his book, Kitchen Confidential, but I hope to pick it up soon. (A friend loaned me McCarthy's Blood Meridian, but I'm not liking it, so I will probably dump it for Kitchen Confidential.)

All in all, I had a great time hearing Bourdain speak. His genuineness gives Bourdain many loyal fans. One of them even got up on stage to show Bourdain a large tattoo of what appeared to be Bourdain on his leg. Bourdain signed it and hugged him. Not too many celebrities inspire that kind of emotion. Bourdain is an original in a world full of copycats and sycophants. God bless him for being himself.

© Matthew Mehdi Rafat (2009) 

Note: I did the best I could to write down Bourdain's words verbatim, but Bourdain speaks quickly and the auditorium was dark, so some of his quotes may be paraphrased.