0086 | August 26, 2019
Climate Change: Pop Culture Takes on the Planet
The hosts explore what pop cultural references to climate change can and can’t accomplish. Does pop culture improve our environmental awareness, or simply point back at itself recursively?
| C.T. WEBB: 00:19 | [music] Good afternoon, good morning, or good evening, and welcome to The American Age podcast. This is C. Travis Webb editor of The American Age, and I am speaking to you from Orange County, California. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 00:29 | Hi. This is Steven G. Fullwood. I’m the Co-founder of the Nomadic Archivist Project, and I’m coming to you from Harlem where they’re sort of muggy here. But it’s supposed to rain in the middle of the day, which I’m hoping that it does. |
| S. RODNEY: 00:40 | And I’m Seph Rodney. I’m a senior editor at the Hyperallergic blog, and recent author of The Personalization of the Museum Visit, which was published at the end of May by Routledge Press. And I’m coming to you from the South Bronx. |
| C.T. WEBB: 00:59 | And this is to remind our listeners that we practice a form of what we like to call intellectual intimacy, which is giving each other the space and time to figure out things out loud and together. We’re continuing our conversation about climate change. And to remind our listeners, we try to come at this– so none of us here are scientists. We have our expertises in a variety of forms, but we are just trying to come at the issue from a variety of angles some of which may not often get talked about. Although it’s hard to imagine, given how saturated the culture is in climate change rhetoric, that we are covering any ground that isn’t talked about, but such as it is. Today’s topic is pop culture. And we thought we’d kind of weigh into representations of climate change. What does it mean in pop culture? How’s it used in pop culture? I come at things– I tend to think of culture in [Barduian?] terms often, and how are we segmenting ourselves based on our cultural affinities? So Seph, Steven. What do you guys have to say? What do you think? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 02:17 | Seph? |
| S. RODNEY: 02:19 | Well, one of the things that first comes to mind is how much I tend to think of climate change through the lens of popular films. And, in fact, I was having a conversation the other day with someone about what my favorite films have been. No that’s not true, no. I was having a conversation with Glenn Adamson who’s a kind of freelance curator. Yeah. He invited me to assist in curating a show that should be mounted at the Crystal Bridges Museum in Arkansas in October of next year. And we were talking about visions of the future, and we kind of together came to the conclusion that there’s a way in which visions of the future that– prognostications that were made 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago that sort of– obvious ones that come to mind. The ones that have a great deal of cultural cache. 1984 by George Orwell. Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. That those kinds of visions along with the films – like Twelve Monkeys, like Snowpiercer, like The Day After Tomorrow – that we end up being in a kind of amalgam of all those visions in some ways. There are aspects of Brave New World we are living through right now. We’re not quite living through what Twelve Monkeys looks like because in Twelve Monkeys violence has ravaged the earth, and basically to go outside you need to have a hazmat suit on. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 04:08 | We’re kind of at 1984 though. |
| S. RODNEY: 04:08 | Right. Exactly. This is actually– |
| C.T. WEBB: 04:12 | I would say 1984 for sure. |
| S. RODNEY: 04:13 | Yeah, yeah, yeah. There’s a way in which our intellectual abilities are being stymied by the culture at large. Anyway, when I think about climate change I think about it as a sort of amalgam of all these filmic visions. I think that there’s a way in which it skews my thinking because it’s sort of always the worst-case scenario. Right? Snowpiercer’s the worst-case scenario. Literally, most of humanity is on a train, and they can’t get off because outside is so toxic that it doesn’t bear human life anymore. |
| S. RODNEY: 05:05 | So I guess what I’m saying is part of my concern, my worry, is that these visions are so dystopic. They’ve fallen off the cliff so far that they lend themselves to being critiqued in that sort of stiff-armed ham-fisted conservative way which is “Oh you guys are always yelling at the moon, saying that it’s the worst thing that’s ever going to be, and of course it’s not. The earth goes through cycles. It’ll be better. We’ll figure it out. La la la.” I don’t know. I don’t know how to feel about that because, of course, I think that conservative point of view is just silly. It is literally about saying fuck it. It doesn’t matter. We’ll figure it out. And then not doing the work to figure it out. But at the same time, I don’t know. It doesn’t feel it’s quite like these films are quite hitting the right note in terms of lighting a fire under us so that we actually undertake some practical solutions to the fact that there’s a geyser full of plastic in the ocean. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 06:36 | Yeah. A trash barge [laughter]. [Bartez?]. |
| C.T. WEBB: 06:40 | Yeah. Yeah, a trash [crosstalk]. Yeah. Yeah. |
| S. RODNEY: 06:43 | Yeah. You know what I’m saying? |
| C.T. WEBB: 06:45 | I do. 1984, which along with Steven, I think is analogous to our moment, I think is a good reminder of a couple things. One, the novel is ostensibly written from the point of view of a history after this doublespeak era has passed. And so ultimately the final message in 1984 isn’t the all-encompassing, intractable nature of the state. It is a description of some future point in time and some future state. We pass through moments like this. This isn’t the first time that civilization, western civilization, even more narrowly, American civilization– you couldn’t get more doublespeaky than the slaveholding states– |
| S. RODNEY: 07:37 | Oh no. It’s the foundation. |
| C.T. WEBB: 07:40 | –I mean, that’s literally states’ rights. That’s doublespeak. Right. It’s not about states’ rights. And so– |
| S. RODNEY: 07:46 | It’s not about race it’s about states’ rights. Right. |
| C.T. WEBB: 07:48 | Right. Yeah. And so that’s not new. It’s part of the baggage that sometimes overwhelms states, large scale cultures with vested power interests that are trying to hold onto their power. That are built on a kind of injustice. So, I mean, clearly, that’s what’s happening right now. Yeah. I mean, there are entrenched interests, energy interests, industrial interests that are focused on maintaining the status quo for a variety of reasons. I don’t find any of those visions or notions plausible because they’re all simplifications, hyperboles to make a valid point about our moment in time. Not some arrow of the future, but about the forces that are always threatening to choke a complex society like ours. And so I think I agree with your recognition of their limitations. I think I probably am not as concerned about that aspect of things. There are things that I am definitely concerned about. But I don’t find pop culture to be a very instructive guide about anything– |
| S. FULLWOOD: 09:19 | Please say nothing but anything. Yeah [laughter]. |
| C.T. WEBB: 09:20 | –as far as other than just how a bunch of people are– whatever the mode or fashion is at that moment, which probably is not very wise. So, Steven, it looks like you’re about to say something. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 09:35 | No. I just love that fact that you said anything. I was like pop culture. I think it’s just reference points. Right. If anything the reference points to go back to the film analysis or the film lens. I think a lot about the dystopian societies, right, and how much people love those films about how much they just don’t appeal to me. They don’t appeal to me. So I was walking it back and thinking about popular culture. Thinking about Blade Runner and Los Angeles with the acid rain and the plumes of fire in the air. And I was like, “This seems terrible.” Right. And so I was wondering if the films and the literature, and some of these other things are in some way speaking to or encouraging or representative of in someway an absolution. The future’s going to be what it is. This is how it is. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 10:29 | And so it absolves you from really kind of thinking about climate change as a threat, but as an inevitability. Right. Because am I going to stop drinking Coke? No, I’m not going to stop drinking coke. Am I going to have it poured into my hand? I’m going to need some sort of container. Okay. So you get the container and you can recycle? I mean, New York fines you if you don’t recycle, but most of the places I travel to don’t have that kind of recycling. |
| S. RODNEY: 10:55 | Exactly. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 10:55 | Law. Right. So it feels like parts of our– |
| C.T. WEBB: 10:59 | Orange County doesn’t. I mean, I’m in a major– |
| S. RODNEY: 11:01 | Really? |
| C.T. WEBB: 11:01 | –it’s a fairly major metropolitan area– |
| S. RODNEY: 11:03 | Wow. |
| C.T. WEBB: 11:03 | –and I mean, now our local municipality does have recycling containers. But many businesses around us do not. There is no apparatus to recycle, and that’s where most consumption happens, right, for businesses, not just in the home. So yeah. New York is very progressive in that way. I guess most of the country is not. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 11:27 | I think so too. |
| C.T. WEBB: 11:28 | Not just my area. I think probably most of the country’s not. |
| S. RODNEY: 11:28 | But let’s expand that out. I think most of the world is not. |
| C.T. WEBB: 11:32 | Yeah. For sure. Absolutely. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 11:34 | Most of the world is not. |
| S. RODNEY: 11:35 | I would imagine that in major European cities, in fact I know, having been in London, having lived there, that there are robust recycling efforts that actually go beyond, at least in terms of scope, go beyond what New York has. |
| C.T. WEBB: 11:53 | Japan and Korea too. Like off the charts. You divvy things up into like 14 or 15 different types of recycling. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 12:01 | Wow. |
| S. RODNEY: 12:03 | Precisely. Precisely. And I don’t think that we come close in New York, and, in fact, compared to that template we don’t even come close to that in London. I like what you’ve both said about not taking many cues from popular culture because it doesn’t really tell you anything about how to think in sophisticated ways about rather sophisticated problems. But at the same time, isn’t it a kind of– isn’t those kinds of exaggerated, dystopian stories– aren’t those key to the ways that we generally think. I mean, if your point, Steven, of those films really being about a kind of absolution. Doesn’t that have exactly something to do with the fact that most places in the US don’t recycle. Isn’t that connected? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 13:05 | I definitely think it’s connected. I just feel as if– and it feels like through reading and through watching television and watching people sort of talk about climate change that– we talked about this before in past podcasts. About Christianity. Some aspects of it is very apocalyptic. |
| S. RODNEY: 13:28 | Mm-hmm. Absolutely. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 13:28 | We’ll be just fine in the future, so– |
| S. RODNEY: 13:31 | Well no, or we won’t. Right? Depending on where you fall on that divide. Right? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 13:36 | Right, and where the future is. Right. So if the future is heaven then here right now we’re not even supposed to be that attached to it. And so– |
| S. RODNEY: 13:43 | Right. That’s the eschatological vision. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 13:48 | Right. And it feels like, like I said, they’re touch points and they’re reference points, but the culture’s never here to– popular culture’s not here to ever inform anybody about anything other than maybe you should lose 15 pounds because you look fat and ugly, and you’re getting older. And go have a baby, and go to the gym. That kind of thing. So pop culture largely is concerned with those things. |
| S. RODNEY: 14:12 | So I just want to put a final point on that. So what you’re saying is that pop culture is essentially concerned with making sure that we– |
| S. FULLWOOD: 14:20 | Consume. |
| S. RODNEY: 14:21 | –and end up looking much like each other. Basically, it’s a kind of social conformity. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 14:29 | Ah. I think so. Yeah. |
| C.T. WEBB: 14:32 | Yeah. I mean, I think it’s useful as a data set. I’d like to sort of shift– I mean, still talking about pop culture, but I had made a passing comment at the beginning where I do think pop culture can be quite useful. And that is we use it to parse ourselves in relation to other strangers, and so one of the things that– I’ll bring up a specific instance of AOC, so Ocasio-Cortez. A month, two months ago, three months ago. Whatever it is. I’m bad at dates like that. There was a story lasted couple of days. Her using big SUVs to travel around New York when she’s very much pro-climate change. And, of course, people that share our politics jump to the defense of– well, what a ridiculous over-simplification that is, and just because she’s using this transportation, you know, she has to live in this society. Doesn’t mean that she’s not championing or in favor of transforming the society. We would not extend the same sympathies to the same kind of uses to other people’s choices around climate change. Right. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 15:52 | That’s a very good point. |
| C.T. WEBB: 15:54 | We would absolutely indict– if you were a vegetarian you would absolutely indite someone’s consumption of meat if– we were just talking about recycling. We would absolutely use this as a shorthand if we saw someone dressed in a sort of– |
| S. RODNEY: 16:11 | MAGA hat. |
| C.T. WEBB: 16:12 | Yeah. I was going to say– thank you. That’s what I was reaching for. And jumping a big pile of fast-food trash. We would immediately jump to that as a shorthand for their environmental ignorance. And so– |
| S. FULLWOOD: 16:29 | Their failings and– yeah. |
| C.T. WEBB: 16:30 | Yeah. And so that’s how we use climate change in pop culture. That’s how we use it amongst ourselves. It’s all about signaling our position vis-a-vis our political leanings. Which unfortunately for most of us, even though I believe in forging as large coalitions as possible, are not well thought through, even for people who share our politics. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 16:58 | I think that’s a very good– yeah. |
| S. RODNEY: 16:59 | And I would tend to agree with that, but I want to nudge you on two things, Travis. And this is more– I’m just going to clarify this for our listeners because you said this, and I think you meant something slightly more nuanced. You said, “AOC, who’s pro-climate change.” Folks listening, Travis did not mean that she’s pro-climate change. I think what you were getting at is that she’s pro-recognition of the crisis that is climate change. |
| C.T. WEBB: 17:29 | Thank you for the correction. Doing something about it. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 17:31 | I like it. |
| C.T. WEBB: 17:33 | The green new deal, etc. Yeah. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 17:34 | Right, right, right, right. And the other thing is that you’re saying, that I wanted to slightly nudge in a different direction was– now I’m losing it. It’s something that you just said about– oh. So you’re saying this is slightly problematic for me because what you’re essentially saying is that a lot of what we’re doing when we talk about climate change, in the way, using the methods of popular culture. Right. Using those kinds of short-hands. Like films like Snowpiercer. You’re saying that we’re essentially virtue signaling. |
| C.T. WEBB: 18:17 | Yeah. That is what I’m saying. Now I’m not saying that’s the extent– I’m not saying that is necessary and sufficient to describe all of the rhetoric around it. But that is how it is being used and deployed on social media in most social contexts. Even though I am– again, I tried to stop doing this in the Podcast. I always feel like, “Ah, I’ve got to let people know. Really not crazy secretly conservative white male.” I always– |
| S. FULLWOOD: 18:54 | Don’t let the white gays get you down [laughter]. |
| S. RODNEY: 18:56 | Right, right right right. Exactly. Exactly. |
| C.T. WEBB: 19:00 | I always do feel a reflex to that, to clarify that, but I do think that, yes, I want to save as many trees as– I love trees. I love ecological diversity. I love clean water and clean air. And festoon the whole country with windmills. And I’m all for it. But it’s thought of, in the political circles that I would typically align mysellf with, it’s really not thought through very clearly. |
| S. RODNEY: 19:45 | What isn’t? |
| C.T. WEBB: 19:47 | Thank you. People’s positions on climate change and what should be done about it. What can be done about it? And I do think it lends itself to what you were fingering earlier Seph, which is a kind of fatalism. Right. It’s capitalism, capitalism, capitalism, capitalism. Well, capitalism is not going away any time soon. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 20:08 | Precisely. |
| C.T. WEBB: 20:09 | Now, who knows in some 500 years, 100 years, things can change in generations very quickly. But this generation is not casting off the yolk of the capitalist system. It’s not happening. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 20:20 | No. It’s not happening. No. |
| C.T. WEBB: 20:22 | So we need to use capitalism to help save the damn planet. That’s our tool, so that’s what we need to use to do what we need to do. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 20:33 | A more imaginative use of capitalism as well. Obviously. |
| C.T. WEBB: 20:36 | Yeah, yeah, yes. |
| S. RODNEY: 20:36 | I agree. I agree. I agree. And the problem with films like Snowpiercer and Twelve Monkeys and– guys, have either of you seen An Inconvenient Truth yet? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 20:48 | Never. I haven’t. I think I’ve [crosstalk]. |
| S. RODNEY: 20:51 | Damn it. |
| C.T. WEBB: 20:51 | I think I’ve basically seen the whole thing in pieces. So I’ve watched it for writing various papers or doing presentations and I think I’ve seen– I’ve never sat down and watched the whole thing but I’ve watched 10 minutes here, 15 minutes there. That kind of thing. |
| S. RODNEY: 21:06 | Okay. Well, okay. Maybe we should just do that as homework then because I feel like we, kind of– |
| C.T. WEBB: 21:10 | Okay. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 21:11 | Okay. |
| C.T. WEBB: 21:11 | Yeah. |
| S. RODNEY: 21:11 | –I think that we kind of need to– because that’s one of the– we kind of need to [crosstalk]. |
| C.T. WEBB: 21:15 | It’s a touchstone. Absolutely. Yeah, yeah yeah. |
| S. RODNEY: 21:16 | Yeah, it’s one of the touchstone accounts of what we’re facing in terms of facing this climate crisis. And interestingly enough I just looked this up. It was done in 2006. That’s more than a decade ago. That’s crazy. Anyway. I think one of the problems with these films is that the ways that they imagine, essentially, out of the capitalist devil-take-the-hindmost kind of system is by utter destruction. Only way that we can imagine ourselves in some other kind of economic– |
| S. FULLWOOD: 21:59 | No, [a state of being?]. |
| S. RODNEY: 21:59 | Right. Economic and social paradigm is for this shit to go to hell. That’s problematic. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 22:09 | I just want to go back to a couple things that were said earlier. Very briefly because you made a really lovely point. I was about to say something about that. And it’s this idea– what Travis was saying about this– it’s not a streamed line, but it’s a very, sort of, I would call it a lazy way of going, “Well you drive SUVs. You can’t be for climate change.” Right. For me it invalidates your politics. It’s an attempt to invalidate your politics and you. And it effectively shuts down a conversation about how we are really into this web. We have these different routes here and there and so forth, but it’s a way not to talk about it. And I think that that’s a lack of imagination about what’s possible. Do you know? And because politicians have to say, “Oh no. I don’t do that because.” Blah blah blah. And defend themselves. It further reduces the conversation at times. |
| C.T. WEBB: 23:02 | Absolutely. Yeah, yeah. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 23:03 | Not always. Sometimes I see people come back and they go, “Yeah I’ll do that, and I’m also for this.” And I love seeing that because then you hear both– |
| S. RODNEY: 23:10 | Both ends. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 23:11 | Right. And you see a human peeking out behind the, whatever, the facade or what have you. And I love that. But that’s all I want to say about that. But one more thing is that climate change and then the resulting dystopian societies are caused by evil men and corporations and or ETs [laughter]. That seems to be the fear-based sensibility of these movies for me. And I can’t tolerate them. I think about them in terms of, “What can I get out of this?” But everyone’s just so scared. And there’s usually a romance involved. There’s usually a white American hero, male, saving people. It’s the same kind of thing going on, but the background is climate. Flooding or earthquakes or tornadoes– |
| S. RODNEY: 23:56 | You’re right. You’re right. That’s true. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 23:57 | And I just go there’s no story here. There’s not a story here. Or at least for me, but that’s all I wanted to say. |
| S. RODNEY: 24:02 | Or at least it’s the most cliched story that you can encounter so that it doesn’t feel like a story anymore. It feels like a brand. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 24:10 | Right. And I like that word cliche because of this. Because it points to where meaning might lie and where people have reference points that are familiar, but if it never rises above that then I’m frustrated. Right. So I just wanted to say about that. |
| S. RODNEY: 24:24 | Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That’s great. Yeah. |
| C.T. WEBB: 24:26 | Yeah. And the other thing I’m realizing I want to make sure to clarify is, I think, as Steven just said, I think those kind of gotcha moments or I think the fact that because Ocasio-Cortez has been driven around in SUVs doesn’t mean anything about anything. It’s a totally meaningless wedge other than to do exactly what Steven just described, which is to shut down one’s own thinking about whatever the issue may be. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 25:01 | So why should we pay attention to you because you do this? |
| C.T. WEBB: 25:04 | My point was that we do that too. That our side of the political spectrum does that too. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 25:10 | Yeah. I hear you. |
| S. RODNEY: 25:12 | Absolutely. |
| C.T. WEBB: 25:13 | So we don’t have to think about the complexities. Earlier in the conversation, Seph you had used the shorthand, which I do too, conservative to describe some of these anti, sort of do-nothing positions on climate change. I don’t know that that is a necessarily conservative position. I was just watching real time last night with Bill Maher and– |
| S. RODNEY: 25:37 | Why? |
| C.T. WEBB: 25:39 | So I have mixed feelings about Bill Maher and the show– |
| S. RODNEY: 25:43 | Me too. |
| C.T. WEBB: 25:44 | I think there is a legitimate good faith effort on his show to engage with issues in a way that is not canned. |
| S. RODNEY: 25:59 | Agreed. Agreed. |
| C.T. WEBB: 25:59 | Even though he falls short of that. |
| S. RODNEY: 26:03 | Intellectually he does. He really does. Constantly. Yeah. |
| C.T. WEBB: 26:05 | Yeah yeah yeah. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 26:05 | No definitely. Well, he wants the joke. He wants to land the joke. I think. More so than to think. |
| S. RODNEY: 26:09 | Right. Exactly. That is precisely my problem. |
| C.T. WEBB: 26:13 | And there are issues on which he is better and worse. But he often has conservative commentators on his show of varying qualities. The one he had last night– I forget the guy’s name, but he’s definitely been on many times. And he’s a Florida republican strategist, and he’s very much pro-environment. His position is absolutely what would be identified as progressive. As far as like protect the endangered species, protect the wetlands. We need to do things to jump on climate change. He called out the fossil fuel industry for its obstruction on these issues. So people who are conservative are just as enthralled by their pop-cultural limitations as progressives are as well. There’s lots of nuance in the conservative block around a variety of issues. But they are also hemmed in. Just the way I might feel hemmed in around being a white male. And how much time I have got to spend carefully placing myself in the conversation so as not to trip anything. |
| S. RODNEY: 27:30 | So my question would be, and I think we’re coming up on time so– |
| C.T. WEBB: 27:34 | We are yes. Thank you. |
| S. RODNEY: 27:34 | We’re going to have to think about how we want to transition to the next week’s broadcast. And I’m not sure you can answer this, not as in ability can, but as in– |
| C.T. WEBB: 27:48 | In the time. |
| S. RODNEY: 27:49 | Right. Or whether you have this information readily at hand. But my question to him, that Florida republican who’s deeply concerned about preservation of the wetlands is does he then also as stridently advocate for enfranchising and protecting the vote of people of color because– |
| C.T. WEBB: 28:19 | Particularly in the state of Florida. Yeah. |
| S. RODNEY: 28:20 | Precisely. Precisely. Because that’s my problem with a lot of the conservative rhetoric around political action is that they silo things off. They say, “Yes, I’m all for the wetlands, but I’m not for this weird socialist AOC inspired la la la.” And when I say they, I mean, I want to be clear. The majority of conservative news outlets, the ones that are recognized by conservatives by everybody else, and by conservatives themselves, and the majority of conservative political machines, essentially the republican party, does exactly that. They will silo shit off and they will say, “Yeah, but that has nothing to do with the voting rights of people of color.” |
| C.T. WEBB: 29:18 | So A, I don’t know that it has anything to do with the voting rights. I think that you have to make an argument about it. I think– |
| S. RODNEY: 29:26 | Okay. I can make an argument but okay. |
| C.T. WEBB: 29:27 | I think I am absolutely in favor of the enfranchisement. We’re talking particularly about felons in Florida. Right, I mean, this is– |
| S. RODNEY: 29:36 | No no no no no. I’m talking about just protecting the vote. |
| C.T. WEBB: 29:38 | No no. But this is the issue in the state of Florida. This is why I thought you brought it up because in Florida, because of the history of incarceration in this country, black men and women are disproportionately represented in the prison system. So because of Florida law, because ex-felons are not allowed to vote without basically becoming a dancing bear and jumping through flaming hoops, they’re disenfranchised. And the voters in Florida overwhelmingly said, “No that’s wrong. These people should be able to vote.” And the Republican controlled legislator and governor have now– |
| S. RODNEY: 30:17 | [Dissentist?]. |
| C.T. WEBB: 30:17 | Yeah. They’ve basically figured out another way. |
| S. RODNEY: 30:20 | A protest. |
| C.T. WEBB: 30:22 | Yeah. So again that’s just– I wanted to make sure to encapsulate I think that’s bullshit. I think compartmentalization though is something we do too. Here’s where I think the difference– and I do think there is a nuance and a difference. What progressives have done is they’ve broadened their rhetoric, but limited their political action horizons. And so it is absolutely true that you across the spectrum for progressives like, “Yeah. I’m all enfranchise this, protect that, green this. Blah blah blah blah blah.” But in reality what are their politics doing? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 31:00 | Agreed. |
| C.T. WEBB: 31:00 | What are their commercial transactions doing? |
| S. FULLWOOD: 31:04 | Agreed. |
| C.T. WEBB: 31:04 | I think that Republicans, in general, tend to be a little bit more politically sophisticated than progressives. |
| S. RODNEY: 31:11 | Yes. Absolutely. In this nation absolutely. |
| C.T. WEBB: 31:13 | And so they have their silo issues. For evangelicals it’s abortion. They will take the biggest, gun-slinging black-hatted asshole in the room if he will make an effort to limit abortion rights in this country. That’s their sacred cow. And you know what? They win elections even though there’s fewer of them. And we honestly– |
| S. RODNEY: 31:44 | They’re super well organized. |
| C.T. WEBB: 31:45 | –I feel like we should be a little bit more educated on– me included. I think we should be a little savvier and a little bit more strategic and tactical. I’m sorry. Tactical about how we engage with these issues. So I’m sorry. Steven, please have the last word. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 32:00 | Very, very briefly I just want to– and I’d love to take this up in a future podcast. The ways in which I feel progressives aren’t honest is that they sometimes believe what the shorthand conservatives actually believe about things. I really, really thought this whole idea of developing the rhetoric versus actual action or more educated action, or more thoughtful engagement with the things you say you believe is profoundly– thank you for that. That was really helpful just thinking through. I was like yeah. Because I think most people believe the things that they claim they don’t. And then it shows through. |
| C.T. WEBB: 32:40 | Yeah. Absolutely. |
| S. RODNEY: 32:41 | It’s a through-line through their intellectual curiosity, bravery and a lot of things for me. So I’d love to take that up sometime. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 32:50 | Okay. All right. So what are we talking about next week? Aren’t we supposed to be moving towards archives or something? |
| C.T. WEBB: 32:56 | Yeah. Material memory archives. We have our resident archivist to help us with that. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 33:02 | Yes. I’m an expert. I’m a master. Grand Poobah of the archives. |
| C.T. WEBB: 33:06 | Your friendly neighborhood archivist. Steven G. Fullword. |
| S. RODNEY: 33:07 | Yeah. The black belt in archiving [laughter]. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 33:10 | Yes. Whatever it is. How you want to frame it. I’ll take it. |
| C.T. WEBB: 33:12 | As soon as you said– I have to say, as soon as you said, “I’m a master,” the lyric gem on it popped into my head. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 33:19 | Oh, I don’t know that song. That’s hilarious. |
| C.T. WEBB: 33:23 | Seph. Thanks very much for the conversation and I’ll speak to you guys next week. |
| S. RODNEY: 33:26 | Okay. Later. |
| S. FULLWOOD: 33:26 | Sounds good. [music] |
References
**No references for Podcast 0086*