the quote is from "1984" by George Orwell but I snapped this photo from the book "Beyond Hypocrisy:Decoding the News in an Age of Propaganda including the Doublespeak Dictionary" by Edward S Herman, who by the way died last year. He wrote the famous (or maybe not famous, since no one cares anymore) book "Manufacturing Consent" with Noam Chomsky
Project Censored, a student researched yearly project from Sonoma state University that examines the most underreported stories of the mainstream media, has lamented the concept of "junk food news" for a long time.
Mainstream media has pretty much been junk for like, DECADES...
So when it came out against Trump during the Presidential election of 2016, I was a little suspicious
Mainstream media could not contain themselves about how awful he was, and to truly demonstrate how awful he was, they went on and on about how he was the most racist man alive, how he was boorish and unmannered, unqualified for the job, he was the new Hitler, he was this, how he was that. A meme even circulated (not a product of a major news outlet but a colluder in the form of Facebook) showing how even past Presidents with dubious administrations from Bill Clinton to George H W Bush were all against him, because he was just such a threat to humanity
And that really made me suspicious
Trump is no good guy, but what had he actually done to deserve this smear campaign? He was friends with you all for starters? And you never complained about him before?
He made cameos in so many movies, and hobnobbed with the Clintons, even donating to their campaigns
And I'm going to suddenly now trust the opinions of Bill Clinton and George Bush ( either one, pick one);they are suddenly these woke good guys?
I have an old acquaintance ( let's call him that), to whom when I stated I couldn't undertstand the media hysteria surrounding Trump, and didn't trust the opinion of Bill Clinton and his fellow ex-Presidents, laughed at me. He said the the media had not been exaggerating their coverage of him, and he defended both the Clintons, claiming that all the stuff about them "was crap"
It makes you feel a little crazy when people you thought were on the same wavelength deviate so hideousuly from you, but then again, with allies and "friends" like these, who needs Republicans?
At any rate, I remember feeling unwell, a sickening feeling welling up in me that I could either not trust myself or the people around me, or were maybe both of these things true, or if only one was, which was worse?
Media manipulation is powerful, and lone star ideas are tenuous because the ignorant masses insist you are wrong
You want badly to fit in, so maybe superficially you go along
And then you read stuff that vindicates you, because you can rely on YOUR observations, and YOUR opinions, and YOUR thinking AFTER ALL
How many left wing activists have I known through the years, how many articles in leftist publications have supposedly questioned the mainstream media and professed how it's content is controlled by a handful of large corporations that would of course push stories that promoted their interests?
But when Donald Trump criticizes them for the same thing ( albeit with a personal interest, but who doesn't have a personal interest in exposing the truth when it benefits them?) suddenly the media needs to be protected? I mean, he's right when he criticizes Jeff Bezos and his ownership of The Washington Post.
CNN and Newsweek and The Washington Post and CBS and ABC all tell us the truth all the time and their right and ability to do so is being infringed upon for the first time ever????
Trump's election has made people crazy, and driven a huge wooden stake in the mainstream narrative
Everything used to fall into place, and be consistent. But now, if you want to criticize Trump, you have to backtrack and suddenly declare that former threats to democracy and decency, like George W Bush, are suddenly benevolent and WELCOME additions to our society. Less like "everyone who disagrees with me is Hitler", more like "Hitler did nothing wrong"
Because I would argue that our past Presidents rank right up there with the Fuhrer when it comes to international human rights violations and the right of sovereign countries to man their own destinies; do you know that one of our Presidents even dropped atomic bombs on an unsuspecting population in Asia! I'd say that was pretty awful, but whatever...
When Bill Clinton rapes someone, or molests women, or abuses his power to have affairs with interns, it's totally cool and boy does that guy have class. He's sexy, and oh-so-feminist; his wife is a bad ass.
When Republicans, or Donald Trump do it, it's horrific, and a vile injustice to women and humanity everywhere.
It can be a question of political bias, but then you make yourself vulnerable when you owe allegiance to one side over the other: you become a stranger to objective truth, and it seems like "gibberish" to you
A modern version of "one minute we're at war with Eurasia, and now, it is Oceania who is our sworn enemy": One minute so-and-so is okay, next day he is a villain, and it's totally okay when OUR GUY does it
And of course, I have to qualify all fo this by saying I'm not trying to defend Trump. But the media hysteria surrounding him is and has always been false, because our media outlets have never cared about real issues if they insist on parading stories about the latest Starbucks coffee drink and the weird way Donald Trump holds a water bottle, so while we might feel that all the information out there is just SO CONFUSING, we can be confident to depend on this confirmed indifference
Coriandra de Bambaway makes everything from scratch, even her own news
Many many years ago, ( amazing it does seem to me how long ago that was), I had a high school teacher who introduced our class to the novel "The Thanatos Syndrome" by Walker Percy. I think he was talking about it in conjunction with fluoridation of water, and how we are all forced to drink this type of water (water "fortified" with fluosilicic acid, not the sodium fluoride put into toothpaste), even if we don't want to, and even if there is evidence critical of its' supposed benefits.
So many people in the political arena claim the novel 1984 by George Orwell as their own, and use it as a lens to describe their experience in the world. Doublespeak, and "war is peace", and the Right claiming that "they're making us all believe 2+2 =5 is we accept the reality of trans people" and stuff like that. Everyone is a Winston Smith, observing the evil machinations of our government, at one time George W Bush is a bumbling warmonger, now he's a cute old man who paints paintings of soldiers and "he looked so cute when his poncho blew into his face that one time", and how long ago was that? Well, maybe it's time the people who oppose forced medicalization on the public, people who question corporate science and its insistence on fluoridation and other questionable health and food initiatives, had their own anthem book; and could "The Thanatos Syndrome" be the one?
Granted, there are other books that have been written signaling the peril of our food industry and the dangers of corruption in science. "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair killed two birds with one stone and covered both horrible labor conditions in factories AND unhygienic food preparation practices. "Arrowsmith" by Sinclair Lewis is a cautionary tale of greed and corruption in the sciences (and one of his character's names is actually used by Percy in his own novel, for the psychiatrist friend of the protagonist, Max Gottleib).
But those novels don't really combine the possible horrors of callous scientific experimentation with a lack of consent in a thrilling, first person, semi-1984 manner. And while The Thanatos Syndrome does this, I am still hesitant as to whether I can make a strong case...
Another way of saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions", when we have a small group of people who think they are better than everyone else, and think they know what is best for everyone else, you have the first plans for the creation of a hell on earth.
(You also have the first inklings of fascism consequently, a rigid non-conformity and standardization punished severely if deviated from)
In this novel, a small group of individuals, including some doctors, introduce "heavy sodium" into the water supply of a select group of people in Louisiana. Because the main character has recently spent the past two years in jail, he hasn't been exposed to the tainted water supply and he has been just enough out of the loop to notice subtle changes in former patients and acquaintances affected by the water when he is released on parole.
His wife has become a genius at bridge and former patients have turned into zombies; female patients presenting rearward because their menstrual cycles have become primate estrus cycles and his patients in general becoming human computers answering questions about calculations and distances between cities without batting an eye and without asking why he even wants to know
But the results of the experiment are clear - crime has virtually disappeared, drug addiction as well, schools in the area have students performing above and beyond national averages, teenage pregnancy is down, and black prisoners at the local prison sing songs of praise as they pick cotton on the prison grounds (!!!)
An interesting aspect of the novel is this little slip of homophobia. I don't know if the author felt this way, but I guess Southerners felt this way. In any case, I'm not trying to judge, I just think it's funny and I hadn't thought about "conversion therapy" in a long time; our experimenters think they know what constitutes a recalcitrant behavior, and homosexuality obviously falls under this category
Thomas More, our hapless main character, can't help but agree with Bob Comeaux, our main perpetrator's assessment of the results of his experiment. But of course he is troubled by the side effects of the additive. Not only are women presenting rearward and acting like automatons, they are also getting into fights with robots, shooting up their horses, and attempting to take out themselves. Plus, and not really emphasized enough in the novel in my opinion, is the fact that none of these individuals was informed and had no choice as to whether they wanted to go undergo this transformation. Their wills have been rejected and their freedoms severely curtailed, by the whims of a few.
Another unfortunate characteristic of the group of individuals who chose to experiment on everyone else is the fact that they're a bunch of pedophiles, and the boarding school that they run uses the sodium ion in a special water source to make sure the children drink eight glasses of the water a day, making them happily compliant, and sometimes even indifferent, to their sexual abuse
The argument Bob Comeaux makes is the argument made by all researchers who are only interested in the success of their enterprise - how dare you question the desire to protect people from dangerous diseases and health conditions? From massive plagues? How can you deprive people of health? Don't you see that the benefits outweigh the risks?
But do they?
Or are the risks being downplayed?
Max Gottlieb describes it as a "simple sodium ion", but the ion in the novel is referred to as "heavy sodium", Na-24, and it is a radioactive isotope of the otherwise benign element. Very reminiscent of the way fluoride was introduced into our water supply, because fluoride's reputation as a violently corrosive and potentially fatal chemical was whitewashed in order to allow its continuation as a vital component of the Manhattan project, used to lubricate equipment against its own corrosive tendencies ( precursor to Teflon) when combined as a fluorocarbon and used to enrich uranium
the cleveland connection
We at the 'Turn are always looking for the Cleveland connection, and you wouldn't think it, but there always seems to be one...
I have visited the old location of the Harshaw Chemical Plant twice, one time many years ago when the buildings were still up, and then recently this past fall. To my great disappointment, the buildings are now gone and the area is surrounded by a wall made by some kind of black plastic fabric. The first time I visited with an acquaintance and I brought my copy of The Fluoride Deception with me. Although the area had long been abandoned, there was a security guard patrolling the area in a white pick up truck, and she asked us what we were doing there. I told her about the book and what the building used to be and she laughed
I know there has been controversy about cleaning the area up because very nearby is a section of a Cleveland Metroparks bike trail
At any rate, many people don't know that Cleveland did participate in the Manhattan project, and that it contained the notorious "Area C", a location where majority African Americans were polluted by fluoride as they worked with it to enrich uranium and provide loads of the resultant substance for the atomic bomb. To anyone in this city who says that fluoride is a benign element, you can look no further than Harvard Road on the west side to find a location where hundreds of people were poisoned by massive amounts of fluoride and not well-educated as to what they were being exposed to, and not very well protected from it.
But since the element was so important to the work of the Manhattan Project, its scientists were desperate to unearth all its health effects and control all information about it so as to control any damage threatened by worker or neighborhood lawsuits. This very same tactic has been used before and since, with other problematic substances and products like radium, asbestos, lead in gasoline, and cigarettes
What's funny about Dr. Comeaux's complaint that if Dr. Fred McKay had hesitated, children everywhere would be suffering from disintegrated teeth, is how that's just simply not true ( as described in one of the excerpts above from Bryson's book. incidentally, Fred McKay doesn't play that big a role in having fluoride put into our water supply).
The Newburgh-Kingston Fluorine-Caries Trial, which is the big study that claims to prove the benefit of fluoride to teeth, was apparently just more experimentation on the part of the scientists of the Manhattan Project. Without making it publicly known, they were much more interested in the non dental medical problems associated with fluoride ingestion, and wanted to control the information coming out about that. A caries prevention study sure is a good cover! ( These are the same scientists and physicians who injected people with plutonium and uranium without their knowledge and consent, check out "The Plutonium Files" by Eileen Welsome. )
At one point, Dr. Comeaux tells Tom to think of "Blue Boy", the name of his experiment, "as another Manhattan Project"
So, where does "tenderness" lead? What is "tenderness", in this case? Is there a real interest in helping others? Or is there more an interest in controlling them? And profiting off that control? Is that interest in helping others a cover for something more nefarious? Convincing people they need to fix something that's not broken, and then ending up with broken people?
I think the book is a good "anthem novel" about the dangers of forcing "medicines" down people's throats. It doesn't have the gravitas or terror of a 1984, but it is a thriller, and what it lacks in melancholy, it makes up for by being a more upbeat, comical take on the absurdity of human beings, instead of a despairingly horrific indictment of one of our greatest dilemmas
Finesse Mandrake has never been to a dentist
They say that history is written by "the winners" (Walter Benjamin, or Winston Churchill, or someone said this)
I always thought this meant the winners of military battles, and therefore whoever won the war, got to write the history of the victories and the losses of those battles, and the history of that war, and they would become the architects of all ensuing historical events FROM NOW ON (like the 'ol "what if the nazis had won?" bit)
This has turned out to be true, as we've seen, from the trials that took place at the Hague regarding the war crimes of Yugoslavia, because the losers in that affair were all put on trial and punished, while perpetrators like Bill Clinton (bombing the Chinese embassy, bombing an innocent population 78 days with bombs including depleted uranium) go onto to be oogled and ogled on twitter "oh you're so classy mr. president" BUT I DIGRESS
And it's probably true, that whoever said that meant specifically war, but it never occurred to brainwashed ol' me that "the winners" could also be referring to something else...
Like cultural wars, like whose ideas dominate a particular scientific orthodoxy? Like religious ideas, and fashion ideas, like anything for that matter
Not really a matter of correctness, but who won out politically, who was more favored, who had the biggest ego and the bossiest personality
Who benefitted the mainstream more?
The story of our fucking lives, right?
Like the bossiest people at work, for instance, who everyone follows even though their ideas or work ethic are not very good
Or the person who gets the job because they look a certain way
so let's explore these controversies as is within our power to do, and see who the mainstream prefers...
nikola tesla vs thomas edison
They're gonna promote their own, right?
Well, Marconi's not a native American, and they give him credit for inventing the radio (although the US patent office gave the credit to Tesla in 1943)
Edison, some say, was a crook, who not only stole ideas from and scammed people like Tesla (from whom he got 25 patents and never paid Tesla for them), but he scammed the very scientists who slaved away at his laboratories in New Jersey. Benignly called "invention factories", but basically groups of scientists being put to work on projects and Edison getting all the credit for them, a way of conducting research and product development that is considered appropriate in today's day and age
He was not even a disciplined, trained scientist - he would repeat experiments over and over again until something finally worked, an inefficient and copout sort of process, revealing a lack of knowledge on the part of the performer of all this repetition
More of a businessman, it seems he was much better at scamming people, and getting other people to do his work for him and that, you could say, was his genius
Tesla and Edison had a dispute over currents, with Tesla representing alternating current, which was able to travel farther and longer without burning out wires
Direct current burns out a little quicker; Edison did apparently kill a lot of animals in his determination to prove that alternating current was bad and "his" direct current was good, which, I think is a pretty shitty thing to do
Both are used in today's day and age
And while Tesla was the one who claimed the energy of the Earth was like a battery and could be split in two and its energy harnessed and we could power our industrial world for free, very recent TV shows like the Canadian show "When Calls the Heart" feature an episode where the protagonist schoolteacher gushes to a class of her pupils that good 'ol Mr. Thomas Edison said that we could harness the energy of the Earth in a similar manner, something he's not famous for ever proposing and which as I have already stated, his rival had proposed we could do
The reason I tend to believe that Edison has been unfairly promoted and Tesla unfairly demoted is because you hear a lot about Edison in school and you never hear about Tesla; the Smithsonian even refused to recognize his achievements in the eighties. While neither invented the forms of electric conduction they were promoting, this controversy isn't discussed in history classes (not in my time). And while there is a lot of controversy over who said what and who did what, when people give others credit for your inventions ( like radio), you know society's got a vendetta against you
Basically, one has been promoted over the other, and the mainstream chose: Edison
albert einstein vs mileva maric vs poincare vs...
"Helping him check his math was a moody Serbian, Mileva MariC ( they even spelled her name wrong they are so starstruck by Einstein), who had been the only woman in his physics class at college." They just had to put in that she was "moody", and I'm sure she became one of the first females to enter university in Europe so she could check some guy's math
According to mainstream folklore, he just came up with this brilliant theory (his only one in fact, he's not known for much else) and his wife who had been his collaborator for so many years contributed ABSOLUTELY NOTHING
Also, there weren't even scientists before him who laid the ground work and investigated these things before he did; NOT AT ALL
They used to work on "their ideas" (referred to in this way in letters to her before they got married) and he gave all the money from the Nobel prize that he won to her. They worked together on their scientific ideas until she started having babies and he relegated her to the role of housewife and he started to take all the credit; this is a totally plausible situation
And while you might dismiss the evidence of the letters, why would someone refer to "our ideas" if she's just helping you with your math?
I find it interesting that a woman is collaborating with a man and there IS NO WAY she contributed ANYTHING to "his work"; her influence went off like water off a duck's back
I mean, LIKE NOTHING
Mileva Maric was one of the first women to be accepted into a European university to study of all things Physics and Mathematics
And it's not like all these scientific discoveries happen in a vacuum. People are building all the time on the ideas people before them came up with; it's not unusual, it is actually unusual when someone just comes along with something completely unheard of or pretends they came up with it on their own
And that's when other people decide that you're totally nuts
So after the popularity of Tesla, and how imaginative and prolific he had been, his achievements have recently been tempered with the fact that "well Faraday came up with alternating current" and the fact that he didn't come up with his ideas out of a vacuum - he improved on them
So Einstein supposedly took other people's ideas further, but the way he is presented is as if he just wakes up one day and the world is figured out
And so while a controversy remains whether his first wife should get more credit, there is also even a controversy as to the validity of his theory to begin with, which I had never even heard of before; I had never even heard of Poincare
His image in society is of a benevolent, wise ol' goofball, when he was a womanizer and a phony pacifist and who knows what happened to some of his kids. His influence on President Roosevelt is cited as being the number one reason this country went ahead and started the Manhattan project, the creation of the atomic bomb and the ensuing deaths of tens of thousands of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
And while you can't directly blame him for those deaths, it's kinda like "what did you think was gonna happen?"
At any rate, the mainstream has chosen him, and both have they ever
sigmund freud vs like everyone
According to a book that's recently come out by a man named Frederick Crews, Sigmund Freud was a fellow a little too full of himself who really hated medicine, exaggerated his supposed oppression for being Jewish, really hated scientific work in general, and really didn't dig experimentation, basing all his now famous theories on behaviors he only observed in himself (which means because HE wanted to fuck his mother, it meant that EVERYONE wants to fuck their mother)
Which if you think about it, it makes sense
People in general tend to go with what they know, and if you've got connections, and you're an alpha persona, you're going to influence the rest of society to your ideas (or opinions). Given that most people in any given time are not educated, literate, or too zombified to think for themselves, it is easy to convince them of something if you want it badly enough
It might be hard to fathom but all society's decisions are decided by small cliques of the popular kids, but when it's as widespread as something tends to get in society, it's considered like a natural law, and not what it truly is, just someone's random opinion that was shoved down everyone's throats
Even Freud's contemporaries thought he was inaccurate, and lofty, and off
But the mainstream chose this winner who I guess, is now a loser
But the damage is done
rosa parks vs claudette colvin
Rosa Parks is the famous lady who refused to give up her seat to a white man and go sit at the back of the bus
But lil' Claudette Colvin did it first
Nine months first
and I guess this by now, 2018, is old news, I only started seeing it emerge in the past few years
I don't understand why her contribution was covered up so long
In the Wikipedia article, she claims her mother told her that white people would prefer Rosa, but I'm not sure why
And throughout the article Claudette does not begrudge Rosa nor does it seem she cared to get the recognition, and then you read that her family has been fighting tooth and nail for her to get it
I read about her eons ago but only started noticing in the bookstore last year - one in a children's book by Chelsea Clinton (UGH i was curious OKAY and it was a laugh riot) and in Bust magazine (see above)
The mainstream wanted Rosa
They say it is hard to educate people when they have been told a big lie their whole lies, so this may be an instance of the wind finally changing on a myth
but who knows?
maybe someone did it before Claudette
the main event: bechamp vs pasteur
Fluorine Magellan loves it when the bad guys win
Remember when Anakin Skywalker was supposed to be the salvation of the Universe in the original Star Wars trilogy? That the man who would become Darth Vader was actually supposed to overthrow the Empire?
And at first it didn't seem like this was gonna happen, because he became the HEAD of the Empire, totally immersed himself in it, but then he betrays the Emperor and throws him over a railing before he can annihilate his son?
Well, there are people out there who believe that Donald Trump is just that - he's playing it cool, he's immersed in the Swamp, but when the time is ripe, he's gonna bust through and bring the whole thing down
He is the fulfillment of a prophecy, and the extreme manifestation of how high America has gone, and how far and hard it will fall
And then of course, there are those who no longer believe that and see that he has surrounded, literally SUBMERGED himself in the swamp, and the evidence is too compelling that he was lying to us all along...but there is always that "isn't that a part of the plan" lingering there?
I mean, what would YOU DO if you were an aspiring political candidate with idealistic motives to improve the welfare of your fellow Americans and you knew if you wore this all on your sleeve, the powers that be would just find a way to get rid of you, like they do to people like Ralph Nader? Like they did to Bernie Sanders?
Could it possibly be? Or this is all some majestic accident?
well, it's portlandia mixed with star wars because it's now the reality we live in and it's the fulfillment of a prophecy
The continued psyop of media hysteria and neoliberal pseudo-hatred of Trump is producing some glaring inconsistencies in the basic narrative of our country. It's polluting the media way more than the media was polluted before, and the ensuing smog and clutter is nauseating to the vast majority of Americans
How do you not go crazy from hearing the incessant drumbeat of Russia-is-to-blame-for-everything and everything-is-wrong-with-Trump?
Racism didn't start with Trump, deportations didn't start with him, and his latest push to increase domestic surveillance in our country was voted for by very same Democrats who have claimed Trump is the new Hitler
But but but
He's such an underling for Israel!
He sure is!
I find it to be a great strategy (if it is one)
If you can't beat 'em
Give 'em the demented horns, and take them to the end of the bridge, and fly off it! so that the world sees how extreme they really are!
Do you really want a supposed racist and proto-fascist to be promoting your country???
Kind of a bad look
But makes sense given that both the administrations and leaders of Israel and the US are into building walls and keeping "undesirables" out
He supports having Jerusalem be the capital of Israel, and he promotes putting the US embassy there - because that wasn't going to cause outrage and international condemnation!
He has also recently declared that he will cut funding and aid to Palestine, all possibly 335 million of it to UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency which provides healthcare and other services to Palestinians, not just in Palestine but to refugees in Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon), if the Palestinians "don't agree to further peace talks" (whatever the hell that means; is it like the terms of the Dayton Accords that Milosevic couldn't have reasonably agreed to?)
And his pit bulldog in the UN, Nikki Haley, only too gleefully boasts about her allegiance to Israel and her desire to do anything to defend its right to murder people and take their land.
The US's once official stance as an unbiased facilitator in the "Middle East peace process" is blown out of the water, and the Obama veneer of numb faux-impartiality is gone - the US can be seen for the one-sided tormentor that it really is; I view this as progress.
I argued with someone in 2016 over this, when people were saying that Trump had no dick, and that saying that was transphobic. Recently, people have been criticizing his weight and his diet, engaging in the same fat shaming that is supposedly a no-no to do to others.There are more compelling criticisms of Trump, and the fact you have to revert to these is pathetic. You have really been triggered so hard you are willing to throw your principles out the window? Or maybe you didn't really have them in the first place
The Obama/Clinton/Democratic veneer of "we're the good guys" IS GONE. It only remains if you are so brainwashed and so stubborn to admit it
Or you have a vested interest
And Trump can make cultural faux pas, and antagonize foreign leaders, and tweet to his heart's content, and you can lament how bad he is supposedly making America look, but in reality, he is the very embodiment of everything America really is, and something which neoliberals refuse to publicly admit of their own country: a thug
A thug country led by a...thug? ( I don't even think he's a thug, I just think he's a pathological goofball)
Will he finally be the hammer that cracks and blows this whole stupid two party monopoly to pieces?
Either by his "outrageous" behavior (which isn't comparatively that bad, but if you're a current hysteric...) or the slowly and inexorably growing common realization that both parties are corrupt and this system just isn't worth defending? That this country as a whole really needs to change?
You're mad because.... he makes us look bad???
He's the guy who might inadvertently expose the truth, when he doesn't really mean to
Everything Trump does just pisses the rest of the world off (most Americans are literally too dumb to notice or care)
No one can continue to defend the US and say its motives are humanitarian, that it's the policeman of the world, that it wants to spread democracy to other nations
To have Nikkiy Haley stand there at the UN and say that the US is "taking names" of those who "voted against us"? US? Who is your allegiance to Ms Haley? and why aren't more tried and true patriotic Americans more angry at your betrayal???
The days of this crapola are coming to an end, and what better way to do it than with a President who is the very embodiment of American arrogance and greed?
Mercedes Finesse wishes she had been deported back to Monaco because damn it would have been cool to grow up there
One of my new year's resolutions this incredible year-to-be is to incorporate another environment-saving habit into my current lifestyle
Hanging up clothes to dry, walking and biking as much as possible (not living in a suburb or rural nowhere), recycling, composting, reducing meat consumption, increasing local food consumption and growing a garden, using as few commercial and synthetic hygiene products as possible, being more discerning with purchases in general, what more can I do? What else can I add?
God, can you be more liberal?
No, because I doubt liberals care much about the environment, unless it's cloaked in "global warming"
While I don't think making injera is really gonna help all that much, if I were to actually succeed at making this very-difficult-to-produce-bread, I would save on water because I could now eat like real Ethiopians and not use many dishes or any silverware!
The arduous journey to actually make this bread brings me to another resolution , this one related to improving my mind and eternal knowledge of the world, but I will come to that later
It is difficult to find a consistent, authentic (they all claim to be authentic on the Internet) recipe for this bread
Ultimately, it's just made with two ingredients: water and teff flour, a gluten-free flour available in Ethiopia and Eritrea and other part of Easter Africa. The basic gist of the recipe is to add water to the flour and then let the mixture ferment (the amount of time here is a bit iffy as well) until it's sour and it bubbles
so this is the second time I have attempted to make this bread, and the SECOND time I let it ferment too long - three days
And although this is a recommended amount of time for the fermentation, and when it finally seems to be fermenting, it just ends up smelling terrible
It smelled so bad it stunk up my entire kitchen, but I decided to try and cook it on the pan anyway, and it just turned into a dark, rancid mess
It was supposed to be perfect!
It's the perfect bread!
Simple ingredients and simple cooking and it tastes so delicious when I eat it at the Ethiopian restaurant!
But it's such a mystery...
Just like the entire continent of Africa is a mystery to me...(just like the country of Yugoslavia was a mystery to so many others for so many years, blacklisted by the mainstream media)
I really think that when you're not presented with much information about a certain part of the world, it's cause you're not meant to know about it
So another of my new year's resolutions is to learn more about Africa
I HAVE A GOAL:
To learn about a new African country every month starting this month, the first month of the year, the month of January
Okay, there are over fifty countries to learn about, so 55 divided by 12, is about 4.58 , so round up, FIVE
five countries a month???
i must learn about five countries a month.
origin of the name, which european country(ies) lorded over it (still lord over it), what are its most prominent natural resources, what languages do they speak, what are their capitals, and what history of dictatorship does it have?
and make a type of food from ONE of the countries
can I do it? can i accomplish this?
and if this online magazine makes it to the end of this year (this glorious year, please make it happen) i will write an article describing my journey, learning about the countries of africa, and enlightening the recesses of my brain with the absence of this information
it will become ornamented with the smells of brand new nations to my mind and a whole new perspective of the world
i will keep a journal, and record everything i learn, and which recipe i've prepared from that particular region
and i will report on it at the end of the year! my adventures learning about africa!!!
on assignment! in my mind! about africa!
other new year's resolutions:
be more positive ( this is a yearly resolution)
exercise every day ( even if i don't lose any weight or get any muscle definition, it makes me feel better and i think better)
finish my goddamned novel and have someone read it and then publish it myself
grow this online magazine
it's important to set intentions and send them into the universe, because if you want something badly and wisely enough, the universe delivers
Jenny Facious just got married and changed her last name to Brightpass, so she's now Jenny Brightpass