Archive for the ‘Alt-right’ Category

Fred Perry withdraws polo shirt adopted by far-right Proud Boys – The Guardian

The fashion brand Fred Perry has pulled one of its famous polo shirt designs after it became associated with a far-right organisation.

The company has halted sales of the black and yellow top in the US and Canada, after it was adopted by the neo-fascist organisation the Proud Boys.

In a statement posted to its website, Fred Perry said it was incredibly frustrating to see the polo shirt and its laurel wreath logo become associated with the group.

The company said that although it sought to represent inclusivity and diversity we have seen that the black/yellow/yellow twin tipped shirt is taking on a new and very different meaning in North America as a result of its association with the Proud Boys. That association is something we must do our best to end.

The statement continued: To be absolutely clear, if you see any Proud Boys material or products featuring our laurel wreath or any black/yellow/yellow related items, they have absolutely nothing to do with us, and we are working with our lawyers to pursue any unlawful use of our brand.

Fred Perry was founded in 1952 by the Wimbledon tennis champion of the same name and has been adopted by various subcultures. In the 60s and 70s its polo shirt became associated with the skinhead movement.

But the brand has repeatedly spoken out against its use by far-right groups. Frankly we cant put our disapproval in better words than our chairman [John Flynn] did when questioned in 2017, the label said in its statement.

Fred was the son of a working-class socialist MP who became a world tennis champion at a time when tennis was an elitist sport. He started a business with a Jewish businessman from eastern Europe. Its a shame we even have to answer questions like this. No, we dont support the ideals or the group that you speak of. It is counter to our beliefs and the people we work with.

The Proud Boys were created by the Vice magazine co-founder Gavin McInnes in 2016 in the lead-up to Donald Trumps election as president. McInnes has since distanced himself from the organisation, which publicly insists it is not alt-right or white nationalist but has a history of glorifying violence and misogyny.

In 2018 the FBI classified the organisation as an extremist group, while the Southern Poverty Law Center lists it as a hate group.

Over the weekend, the Proud Boys organised a pro-Trump rally in Portland. Kate Brown, the Oregon state governor, declared a state of emergency in anticipation of white supremacist groups coming from out of town but far fewer people than anticipated showed up.

Read the original post:
Fred Perry withdraws polo shirt adopted by far-right Proud Boys - The Guardian

Uncle Sam: Trump has COVID-19, and that’s not good – The Post

Early in the morning of Oct. 2, President Donald Trump tweeted that he and the first lady both tested positive for COVID-19. Since then, weve learned hes experiencing mild symptoms.

For many leftists, this may seem like karma. Indeed, Trump has abetted if not spearheaded many of the virus denialism and general aimlessness that has characterized this countrys response to the pandemic. He told us the virus would be gone by Easter, he refused to wear a mask until more than 100,000 Americans died and he even poked fun at Joe Biden for wearing a mask during the first presidential debate. On top of that, Trump has become the third far-right world leader to contract the virus, after the UKs Boris Johnson and then Brazils Jair Bolsonaro.

For many leftists, Trump catching the virus is a long-awaited iteration of poetic justice Its Trumps alt-right, pro-corporate, anti-science mentality coming back to bite him. And maybe it is. Many have already made a strong case that Trump has blood on his hands for how poorly he responded to the pandemic. So maybe, individually, Trump is getting what he deserves.

However, Trump is the president, and the effects of him having COVID-19, whatever they may be, influence things well beyond him as an individual. They will affect the nation as a whole. And whatever the outcome of his battle with the virus may be, the effects will not be good. This is the most imminent danger a sitting US president has been in since the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan 39 years ago. The implications of that are significant, and there are three potential outcomes that we should explore in more detail: that Trump overcomes the virus with no lasting effects, that Trump succumbs to the virus or that Trump survives but with long-term complications.

If Trump survives with no issues, he will likely take it as a divine mandate to double down on his insidious agenda. To understand what I mean here, consider what happened to Reagan after he survived an assassination attempt in 1981. Reagan saw his survival as a mandate from God. His ratings soared, and he used the momentum to intensify his efforts toward his initiatives. Trump, who already thinks he is the chosen one, would use his overcoming of the virus to his advantage, taking it as a full steam ahead signal from above.

He could also use his own survival to double down on his reckless handling of the virus. Its not hard to imagine him saying, I survived. I was fine. Now we can reopen the country. In other words, he would take his experience of survival and extrapolate it to everyone else. Trump surviving with no consequences would mean that we may find ourselves with an intensified version of what we already have. That would be dangerous.

Of course, I am not saying that the second alternative is better. Trump, being a 74-year-old male, obese and elderly, is in an extremely high-risk group, so, while sobering, we must consider the potential implications of his passing. First, no matter how evil and incompetent he may be, I do not wish that he dies. I do not wish for anyone to die. But, more concretely than such wishy-washy moral arguments, there is a practical case to be made for why it would not be good. If Trump were to succumb to COVID-19, imagine his supporters: they would be livid. Once again, it is not hard to imagine them speculating that he was poisoned by the radical left. Such skepticism, anger and sorrow about his death among his most fervent supporters (of which there are many) could very easily lead to civil unrest.

Furthermore, consider who would take Trumps place: Vice President Mike Pence. President Pence, many would say, could be even worse than President Trump. Beyond that, we cannot pretend that the significant presence of right-wing movements in this country will be over when Trump and Pence leave, whether by election or otherwise. The alt-right is here to stay, at least for the time being. Wishing for the death of Trump is both morally questionable and ignorant of the deeper trends he is a symptom of.

The final possibility that Trump survives but with significant lasting side effects would likely include some combination of outcomes from the previous two. He may still have a sense of divine support, but his supporters would still be enraged about his incapacitation. If the lasting effects of the virus were very severe, he may only be in office as a figurehead, much as what happened to President Woodrow Wilson after his stroke in 1919.

At this point, after all the doom and gloom, it is worth considering that Trump may have a change of heart: after experiencing the virus himself, maybe he will begin to take it more seriously and change course toward more pragmatic pandemic responses. But, given what we know about Trump and his headstrong nature, this optimistic possibility seems unlikely.

Ultimately, while the temptation for leftists to say, Told ya so, to Trump and his crew is understandable, there are not many positive outcomes to Trump having COVID-19. In fact, Trumps contracting the virus could prove to be incredibly dangerous for this country in many ways, ranging from right-wingers finding righteousness in Trumps survival to civil unrest over his death. So, before leftists excitedly proclaim that justice has been served, they must consider the nuanced realities of the situation. Yes, there is sweet irony here, but it could be bad news for us all.

Sam Smith is a rising senior studying geography at Ohio University. Please note that the views and opinions of the columnists do not reflect those of The Post. Want to talk more about it? Let Sam know by tweeting him @sambobsmith_.

Read more from the original source:
Uncle Sam: Trump has COVID-19, and that's not good - The Post

Red Pill is a disconcerting tale of obsession – The Economist

The disenchanted protagonist of Hari Kunzrus new novel becomes fixated on an alt-right screenwriter

Sep 28th 2020

Red Pill. By Hari Kunzru. Knopf; 304 pages; $27.95. Scribner; 14.99

THE NAMELESS narrator of Red Pill, Hari Kunzrus sixth novel, is a Brooklyn-based writer who, early one January, leaves his wife and young daughter for a three-month residency at a scholarly centre in the Berlin suburb of Wannsee. He expects a retreatpart cultural, part meditativeoffering peace and solitude in which to complete a book. Instead he finds a place which emphasises teamwork and monitors his productivity in a communal workspace. Rather than play by the rules, he eschews human interaction and abandons his labours to take long lakeside walks or stay in his room binge-watching Blue Lives, a violent American cop show.

One night he ventures further afield and attends a glitzy film-festival party in downtown Berlin. There he meets Anton, the creator of Blue Lives, and during a fraught conversation he challenges his new acquaintance about the shows nihilistic outlook and brutal content. Later, Anton and his cronies candidly air their alt-right views and then humiliate the narrator, igniting a burning desire for a showdown to recover his lost pride. So begins a dark journey in pursuit of justice and meaning which lays bare his soul and threatens his sanity.

This is a tense, absorbing tale of paranoia and dislocation, madness and obsession. The atmosphere is unsettling. Wannsee is chilly and bleak; the narrators gloomy strolls include both a visit to the house where the Nazis planned the Final Solution and repeated pilgrimages to the grave of Heinrich von Kleist, a Romantic writer who killed himself and his death partner. Even in his own room the narrator comes to suspect he is being watched through hidden cameras.

At the end of Mr Kunzrus previous novel, White Tears (2017), the reader was made to wonder if its protagonist was unhinged or merely unreliable. In this book there is less ambiguity about the narrators precarious state of mind. Im going to be living rent free in your head from now on, Anton tells him with malicious glee, unaware of the depth of his fixation and of the anxieties suffered by disaffected Americans like him.

Red Pill lacks the scope and invention of Mr Kunzrus time-travelling, multi-vocal novel Gods Without Men (2011). It takes a while to gain momentum. But when Anton appears and jeopardises the narrators equilibrium, the novel changes gear, opening up to illuminate other perspectives and explore the trials of pursuing truth and reason in a hostile world.

See the original post:
Red Pill is a disconcerting tale of obsession - The Economist

A Pro-Trump Militant Group Has Recruited Thousands of Police, Soldiers, and Veterans – Defense One

Editors Note:After this story was sent to press for the November issue ofThe Atlantic, President Donald Trump was asked in the September 29 debate whether he would condemn white supremacists and militia groups and say that they need to stand down. The president said Sure, and then said that the Proud Boys, a militant nativist group, should stand back and stand by as the election approaches.

Stewart Rhodes waslivinghis vision of the future. On television, American cities were burning, while on the internet, rumors warned that antifa bands were coming to terrorize the suburbs. Rhodes was driving around South Texas, getting ready for them. He answered his phone. Lets not fuck around, he said. Weve descended into civil war.

It was a Friday evening in June. Rhodes, 55, is a stocky man with a gray buzz cut, a wardrobe of tactical-casual attire, and a black eye patch. With him in his pickup were a pistol and a dusty black hat with the gold logo of the Oath Keepers, a militant group that has drawn in thousands of people from the military and law-enforcement communities.

Rhodes had been talking about civil war since he founded the Oath Keepers, in 2009. But now more people were listening. And whereas Rhodes had once cast himself as a revolutionary in waiting, he now saw his role as defending the president. He had put out a call for his followers to protect the country against what he was calling an insurrection. The unrest, he told me, was the latest attempt to undermine Donald Trump.

Over the summer, Rhodess warnings of conflict only grew louder. In August, when a teenager was charged withshooting and killing two peopleat protests over police brutality in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Rhodes called him a Hero, a Patriot on Twitter. And when a Trump supporter was killed later that week in Portland, Oregon, Rhodes declared that there was no going back. Civil war is here, right now, he wrote, before being banned from the platform for inciting violence.

By then, Id spent months interviewing current and former Oath Keepers, attempting to determine whether they would really take part in violence. Many of their worst fears had been realized in quick succession: government lockdowns, riots, a movement to abolish police, and leftist groups arming themselves and seizing part of a city. They saw all of it as a precursor to the 2020 election.

As Trump spent the year warning about voter fraud, the Oath Keepers were listening. What would happen, I wondered, if Trump lost, said the election had been stolen, andrefused to concede? Or the flip side: What if he won and his opponents poured into the streets in protest? The U.S. was already seeing a surge in political violence, and in August the FBIput out a bulletinthat warned of a possible escalation heading into the election. How much worse would things get if trained professionals took up arms?

Id been asking a version of these questions since 2017, when I met a researcher from the Southern Poverty Law Center who told me about Rhodes and the Oath Keepers. Shed received a leaked database with information about the group, and she said it might contain some answers.

Rhodes was alittle-known libertarian blogger when he launched the Oath Keepers in early 2009. It was a moment of anxiety on the American right: As the Great Recession raged, protesters met the new president with accusations of socialism and tyranny. The greatest threats to our liberty do not come from without, Rhodes wrote online, but from within. Republicans had spent eight years amassing power in an executive branch now occupied by Barack Obama. The time for politics was ending. Our would-be slave masters are greatly underestimating the resolve and military capability of the people, Rhodes wrote.

Rhodes had joined the military just out of high school, hoping to become a Green Beret, but his career was cut short when he fractured his spine during a parachute training jump. After his discharge, he worked as a firearms instructor and parked cars as a valet. In 1993, he dropped a loaded handgun and it shot him in the face, blinding him in his left eye. The brush with death inspired him, at 28, to enroll in community college. He went on to the University of Nevada at Las Vegas, where he graduated summa cum laude, and then to Yale Law School, where he won a prize for a paper arguing that the Bush administrations enemy-combatant doctrine violated the Constitution.

He married a fellow libertarian, started a family, and hung out a shingle as a lawyer in MontanaIvy League quality without Ivy League expense, read a classified ad in 2008. He volunteered for Ron Pauls presidential campaign that year. But after the election, he veered from politics toward something darker.

His blog post was both a manifesto and a recruiting pitch. He based it on the oath that soldiers take when they enlistminimizing the vow to obey the president and focusing on the one that comes before it, to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Law-enforcement officers swear a similar oath, and Rhodes wrote that both groups could refuse orders, including those related to gun control, that would enable tyranny. And, if necessary, they could fight.

Responses poured in, and Rhodes published them on his blog:

Your message is spreading and I will make sure it gets to more Marines.

Not only will I refuse any unlawful order that violates the Constitution I will fight the tyrants that give the orders. Rest assured that me and my brothers in Law Enforcement talk about this subject on a regular basis.

I fully support you and what you stand for and I do talk about these things with some of my subordinates, an Air Force officer wrote. Those who I trust that is.

Rhodes kept the nature of the Oath Keepers ambiguousthe group was officially nonpartisan and was not, as a later post on the blog put it, a militia per se. Even so, he cautioned that its members would be painted as extremists and said they could remain anonymous. We dont ask current-serving law enforcement and military to sign up on any kind of membership list, he said in a radio interview. We think thatd be foolish.

But eventually he did create such a list. It collected members names, home and email addresses, phone numbers, and service histories, along with answers to a question about how they could help the Oath Keepers. Last year, the Southern Poverty Law Center passed the entries for nearly 25,000 people along to me.

On April 19,2009,Rhodes traveled to Lexington Green, in Massachusetts, for the anniversary of the first shots of the American Revolution. Standing before a crowd of new members, he led a reaffirmation of their oaths. With him were two heroes of the militant right: Richard Mack, who popularized the idea that county sheriffs are the highest law in the land, and Mike Vanderboegh, the founder of the Three Percenters, an umbrella militia based on the myth that it took just 3 percent of the population to fight and win the Revolutionary War.

With his Ivy League law degree, Rhodess background was unusual. One of the first cases hed taken on after law school was helping with the pro bono defense of a militia leader jailed for making machine guns. His early writings on his blog, and on a web forum where he used the handle Stewart the Yalie, reveal a fixation on the rise of the hundreds of militia groups that, in the early 1990s, loosely coalesced under the banner of the Patriot movement.

Rhodes was deeply affected by the 1993 government siege outside Waco, Texas, which ended in the deaths of more than 70 members of an armed Christian sect, which to him showed the danger of government power. But the Patriot movement became notorious for its connections to white nationalistsand it fell apart after Timothy McVeigh, whod attended militia meetings, bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995.

Rhodes wanted to avoid repeating these earlier groups mistakes, and he showed a talent for giving fringe ideas more mainstream appeal. His refusal to call the Oath Keepers a militia helped, as did the fact that he put a disavowal of racism on his blog and warned members not to make overt threats of violence. He insisted that the Oath Keepers would fight only as a last resort.

Rhodes believed that the militia groups of the past had been too secretive, which made the public suspicious and gave authorities more leeway to crack down. He established the Oath Keepers as a registered nonprofit with a board of directors; members did relief work after hurricanes and spoke at local Republican events. They could walk into police stations or stand outside military bases with leaflets; they could meet with sheriffs and petition lawmakers.

Rhodes wrote a creed listing 10 types of orders that members vow to resist. Gun-control laws are first among them. Then come libertarian concerns such as subjecting American citizens to military tribunals and warrantless search and seizure. After those come more conspiratorial fearsblockades of cities, foreign troops on U.S. soil, putting Americans in detention camps. Here Rhodes was drawing from the New World Order theory, a worldview that is central to the Patriot movementand that can be traced back to what the historian Richard Hofstadter, writing in the 1960s, called the paranoid style in American politics. It linked fears of globalism, a deep distrust of elites, and the idea that a ballooning federal government could become tyrannical.

Rhodes appeared onHardballandThe OReilly Factor, where his ideas were called dangerous; on conservative talk radio, where they were met more favorably; and onThe Alex Jones Show, where he was featured so often that he and Jones became friends. He kept the Oath Keepers at the vanguard of the Patriot movement, which was seeing a resurgence, and traded his blog for a website that sold branded body armor and a Facebook page that reached half a million followers before it was shut down in August.

In 2014, Rhodes and the Oath Keepers joined an armed standoff between Patriot groups and federal authorities in Nevada on behalf of the cattle rancher Cliven Bundy. The next year, they led another standoff, at the Sugar Pine Mine in Josephine County, Oregon. Both times, what started as a dispute over land-use issues became a rallying cry on the militant right. Both times, the authorities backed down. In 2014, Rhodes sent teams to Ferguson, Missouri, to protect businesses during the unrest over police brutality after Michael Browns killing. Images of Oath Keepersstanding guard on rooftopswith semiautomatic rifles became symbols of an America beginning to turn on itself.

In Trump, the Patriot movement believed it had an ally in the White House for the first time. In 2016, when Trump had warned of election fraud, Rhodes put out a call for members to quietly monitor polling stations. When Trump warned of an invasion by undocumented immigrants, Rhodes traveled to the southern border with an Oath Keepers patrol. He sent members to protect Trump supporters from the protesters at his rallies and appeared in the VIP section at one of them, standing in the front row in a black Oath Keepers shirt. When Trump warned of the potential for civil war at the start of the impeachment inquiry last fall, Rhodes voiced his assent on Twitter. This is the truth, he wrote. This is where we are.

Even whilehe courted publicity, Rhodes maintained secrecy around his rank and file. Monitoring groups couldnt say for sure how many members the Oath Keepers had or what kind of people were joining.

But the leaked database laid everything out. It had been compiled by Rhodess deputies as new members signed up at recruiting events or on the Oath Keepers website. They hailed from every state. About two-thirds had a background in the military or law enforcement. About 10 percent of these members were active-duty. There was a sheriff in Colorado, a SWAT-team member in Indiana, a police patrolman in Miami, the chief of a small police department in Illinois. There were members of the Special Forces, private military contractors, an Army psyops sergeant major, a cavalry scout instructor in Texas, a grunt in Afghanistan. There were Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, a 20-year special agent in the Secret Service, and two people who said they were in the FBI.

I will not go quietly into this dark night that is facing MY beloved America, a Marine veteran from Wisconsin wrote; an officer in the Los Angeles Police Department said hed enlist his colleagues to fight the tyranny our country is facing. Similar pledges came from a police captain in Texas, an Army recruiter in Oregon, and a Border Patrol agent in Arizona, among many others. Funny story, wrote a police sergeant in a St. Louis suburb. I stopped a speeding truck driver, who had your decal on the side of his truck, I asked about it, he went on and on, I said, Damn Im all about this. He listed skills as a firearms and tactical instructor and said he would forward the membership application to his fellow officers. A special agent in the New York City Police Departments intelligence bureau recalled that hed been heading to work one day when he saw a window decal with the Oath Keepers logo and jotted down the name on his hand. He vowed to be ready if the balloon ever goes up.

Many answers to the question of how new members could help the Oath Keepers were innocuous: I make videos! and Not much but my big mouth! Too old for much else! People offered to show up at protests, hand out flyers, and post on Facebook. Others provided rsums with skills suited for conflict. A soldier with a U.S. Army email address detailed a background in battlefield intelligence, writing, I am willing to use any skills you identify as helpful, and an Iraq War veteran pledged any talents available to a former infantry team leader. Still others listed skills in marksmanship, SWAT tactics, interrogation. A Texas businessman offered his ranch for training or defensive purposes, and a Michigan cop, retired from the Special Forces, volunteered as a tactical/political leader when occasion arrives in near future.

As I pored through the entries, I began to see them as a window into something much larger than the Oath Keepers. Membership in the group was often fleetingsome people had signed up on a whim and forgotten about it. The Oath Keepers did not have 25,000 soldiers at the ready. But the files showed that Rhodes had tapped into a deep current of anxiety, one that could cause a surprisingly large contingent of people with real police and military experience to consider armed political violence. He was like a fisherman who sinks a beacon into the sea at night, drawing his catch toward the light.

The entries dated from 2009 until 2015, not long before the start of Trumps presidential campaign. I used them as a starting point for conversations with dozens of current and former members. The dominant mood was foreboding. I found people far along in deliberations about the prospect of civil conflict, bracing for it and afflicted by the sense that they were being pushed toward it by forces outside their control. Many said they didnt want to fight but feared theyd have no choice.

The first person I contacted, in January, was David Solomita, an Iraq War veteran in Florida whose entry said that a police officer had recruited him to the Oath Keepers while he was out to dinner with his wife. I didnt mention civil war when I emailed, yet he replied, I want to make this clear, I am a libertarian and was in Iraq when it became a civil war, I want no part of one.

Later, Solomita said that hed been an Oath Keeper for a year before leaving because Rhodes wanted to be at the center of the circus when [civil war] kicked off. Americas political breakdown, he added, reminded him too much of what hed seen overseas.

On Martin LutherKing Day,I walked into downtown Richmond, Virginia, behind a group of white men in jeans with rifles on their shoulders and pistols at their waists. A mother pulled her toddler away, whispering, Those men have guns. Semitrucks paraded down the street, flying Trump flags. They blared their horns, and the men cheered. Soon I was at the state capitol, surrounded by 22,000 people,many of them carrying AR-15sand political signs.oppose tyranny. guns save lives. trump 2020.

In Virginia, the holiday is the occasion for an annual event called Lobby Day, when citizens petition lawmakers about any issue they like. This year,the atmosphere was charged. The state legislature had just sworn in its first Democratic majority in two decades, and lawmakers had advanced a raft of gun-control measures. Rural counties were declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries as sheriffs vowed not to enforce new gun laws. Virginia is an open-carry state, and armed protesters from across the country had turned the day into a rally for gun rights.

Rhodes was there, along with some other Oath Keepers. On a Facebook page called The Militias March on Richmond, an organizer of the event declared that hed sworn an oath to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic when he joined the military and the policeand now a militia. He called Virginia the scene of a great awakening.

Virginia was a microcosm of the far rights fears for the 2020 election: a swing to the left followed by an immediate push for gun control that would be the starting point for a wider assault on American freedoms. Many current and former Oath Keepers told me that gun rights were what had inspired them to join the group; some dismissed the more lurid parts of Rhodess list of 10 orders to defy.

David Hines, a conservative writer, has called guns the rights most successful organizing platform. The issue demands local involvement, to closely track not just federal but state and municipal laws and politics. Guns are also social. To shoot them, youll likely head to a range, and to buy them, youll likely visit a store or a gun show where youll find people who share your mindset. Guns, Hines writes, are onramps to activism.

I couldnt find Rhodes or any other Oath Keepers as I squeezed through the crowd. Instead I met protesters like Daniel McClure, a 23-year-old working as a contractor for the Tennessee Valley Authority, who stood with his dad near the capitol lawn. He was pleased by the turnout, he told me, but also willing to abandon peaceful protest if democracy stopped working. His idea of responsible citizenship meant keeping the prospect of insurrection in reserve. He repeated a maxim I heard often: Gun rights are the rights that protect all the rest. If speaking softly wont work, he said, lifting the butt of his rifle, the stick will come.

Before the rally, the FBI had arrested alleged white supremacists who planned to fire on the crowd to incite a wider conflict, according to prosecutors, and social media had been filled with not-so-veiled threats against Virginias Democratic lawmakers. I was struck by how commonplace talk of violence had become. Liberals had been invoking it, too. Your little AR-15 isnt going to do shit to protect you from the governmentwho has tanks and nuclear weapons. That is a pathetic fantasy, the top aide to a Virginia lawmaker had written in a viral tweet a few months earlier.

In the crowd, I noticed men muttering into walkie-talkies, their eyes hidden behind wraparound shades. To me they had the aspect of children playing at war, only their guns were real. There was a loud bang, and I whirled around as hands moved toward triggers. But someone had only knocked a metal sign onto the pavement.

The rally ended peacefully. Protesters picked up trash as the men with walkie-talkies faded into the city.

Thats a nicetransition,ISIS to us, Rhodes said when I first called him, in February, and told him what had led me to the Oath Keepers. It wasnt just the membership files. In 2016, Id been reporting on the fall of the Islamic State in Mosul when I noticed that Americans were threatening civil conflict at home and wondered if any of them were really serious.

I told him theres nothing worse than civil war. I beg to differ, he replied. He ticked off dictators: Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao. I think what was done by them was far worse, he said. If youre going to slide into a nightmare like that, you need to fight. He referenced a passage fromThe Gulag Archipelago, by the Russian dissident Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn:

People on the militant right often cite these lines or a similar passage from an acclaimed 1955 book about Germanys descent into Nazism,They Thought They Were Free:

For people like Rhodes, the message of both passages is the same. Americans are sleepwalking toward an abyss. Patriots need to wake up and resist.

Its not just about guns, Rhodes said. But guns were at the heart of it. Trump was stoking the idea that conservatives are a minority threatened by a demographic tide that will let liberal citiesdictate the termsfor the rest of the country. When I asked Rhodes and other people on the militant right to name concerns beyond gun rights, they mentioned how history is taught in schools, or how the Green New Deal would threaten land use, agriculture, single-family homes. They stressed that America is a republic, not a democracy. Liberals, Rhodes told me, want to see a narrow majority trampling on our rights. The only way to do that is to disarm us first.

I asked whether the Oath Keepers were white nationalists. The group had participated in events with the Proud Boys, a group of self-described Western chauvinists, and provided security at a so-called free-speech rally headlined by the alt-right activist Kyle Chapman. Were not fucking white nationalists, Rhodes said, pointing out that the Oath Keepers have disavowed the Proud Boys and that their vice president is Black. Thats the new smear. Everybody on the right is a white nationalist. And when you have that drumbeat of demonization, then what are we supposed to think?

Like Trump, Rhodes relentlessly demonizes Black Lives Matter activists as Marxistsa foreign enemy. And he dwells on imagined threats from undocumented immigrants and Muslims that fit his ideas about a globalist push to undermine Western values. His mother is from a family of Mexican migrant laborers; as a child, he spent summers picking fruit and vegetables alongside them. But he told me that his relatives were conservative Christians and that theythe key wordassimilated.

Rhodes said I should investigate militant groups on the left such as the John Brown Gun Club, and seemed obsessed with antifa, which he said the Oath Keepers had faced down while providing security at right-wing rallies. If Trump wins, guess whos going to show up, he said. The left will be in the streets rioting.

He added that hed been using liberals drumbeat of anti-cop sentiment in his outreach to police. Thats what we tell them: Come on, guys. They hate your guts.

The most famousOath Keeper after Rhodes is John Karriman, a pastor and former police trainer from Missouri who participated in the Ferguson operation. Critics saw the Oath Keepers presence in Ferguson as inflammatory, an attempt to intimidate protesters. But to Karriman, the operation was a success: Theyd helped protect the community, including a Black-owned business, and left without raising their weapons. It was an example of what he wanted the Oath Keepers to bea group that could keep our country free and keep our fellow travelers honest and not step a foot over the line, he told me. I had high hopes that the Oath Keepers could be the brand that other groups could rally around.

But behind the scenes, Karriman and others who were close to Rhodes told me, the Oath Keepers were plagued by dysfunction. Rhodes would disappear for long stretches and stall on initiativessuch as a national program to offer community training in firearm safety, first aid, and disaster reliefthat would have been a boon to recruiting. Wealthy donors offered money, Karriman said, but when they asked to see the groups books, Rhodes declined. In 2017, a blogger publishedallegations of embezzlementby the groups IT administrator and accused Rhodes of covering it up, citing documents and recordings. Karriman demanded reforms but was ultimately pushed out. Other board members resigned, chapters dissolved, and the membership files were leaked to the Southern Poverty Law Center. (Rhodes denies these accusations and attributes them to a coup attempt by people with whom he has ideological differences.)

Several former deputies to Rhodes told me his behavior had grown erratic. At the Bundy-ranch standoff in 2014, hed claimed to have intelligence that the Obama administration was planning a drone strike on the Patriot encampment. The Oath Keepers pulled back as militiamen from other groups accused them of desertion. The next year, he said in a speech that John McCain should be tried and hanged for treason because he supported the indefinite detention of American citizens suspected of terrorism. Afterward, he told me, he began facing heightened scrutiny at airports. In 2015, he was disbarred. In 2018, his wifepetitioned for an order of protectionduring divorce proceedings, alleging that Rhodes had once grabbed their daughter by the throat and had a habit, during marital arguments, of waving a pistol in the air before pointing it at his head. (Rhodes denies these allegations. The petition was not granted.)

He was also pushing the Oath Keepers in a direction that clashed with the quieter mode some of his members favored. In the files, I found a note appended to the entry of an Air Force officer asking that his name be stricken from the rolls. The officer will still be with us, the note read, but he wanted to protect his 15-year career in the military. The note was from Steve Homan, a Vietnam veteran from Nebraska and a former vice president of the Oath Keepers. When I called him, he recounted how hed focused on recruiting people with military skills while trying not to draw too much attention. He weeded out the wild hats. He wanted people willing and able to slug back against the government if necessary but levelheaded enough not to start the fight. He referred to them as quiet patriots, his version of the militant rights Gray Man trope, a silent majority that will come to his side in a conflict.

This description fit a Special Operations soldier I found in the files who told me hed never appeared at an event but was ready to step in if needed. He has an Oath Keepers bumper sticker on his vehicle at the base, so that other soldiers will ask him about it. The question of violence, he said, definitely comes up, and my response is that it absolutely could include armed conflict. I like to use the Revolutionary War as an example. The militias were there, well armed and organized, not looking to pick a fight but ready when it happened.

Homans approach required subtlety, and gathering a band of gray men in the shadows was difficult when Oath Keepers were toting weapons on the national news. Appended to several entries, I found letters of resignation in which people complained that the group was becoming too militialike. But I also noted spikes in new memberseach paying a $50 annual feewhen Rhodes made headlines. The publicity and the money, it was feeding him, Homan recalled. Eventually he resigned.

One Marine veteran told me that when he signed up in 2013, hed recently retired after seven years as a military contractor, during which hed trained indigenous forces in Afghanistan. Senior Oath Keepers asked him to provide members with paramilitary training. He warned Rhodes that training the wrong people could lead to trouble; they might even turn on him. But he agreed after Rhodes said he could do the vetting himself.

He kept a lookout for people who displayed red flags such as talking about making explosives or silencers. There were guys who wanted to go full-blown militia. And there were people like myself who just wanted to support the community in case of a breakdown in order, he said. Eventually he felt that Rhodes was adopting an offensive mindsetalmost pushing for a fight, especially after the Bundy standoff. He resigned, became a sheriffs deputy, and is now training as a priest.

In April,a group called the Michigan Liberty Militia appeared with semiautomatic rifles at a rally in the state capitol, where protesters were demanding an end to coronavirus lockdowns and calling the governor a Nazi. The militiamenlooked down from a second-floor balconyas lawmakers wearing body armor pushed through the crowd below. Images of the scene went viral. Afterward, I called one of the militias leaders, Phil Robinson, at his home in a small town west of Lansing. Im not going to lie to you, man, he told me. I feel like a movie star.

Rhodes, meanwhile, was struggling to find his place in the anti-lockdown movement. He initially worried about the pandemic, and wrote an early post urging shutdown measures before facing a backlash; one prominent Oath Keeper accused him of being controlled opposition and resigned. Soon Rhodes was in the unmasked crowds himself, echoing Trumps claims that the hysteria about the virus was part of a plot against him.

But the ideas that Rhodes had helped popularize were spreading. Robinson told me hed never been in the police or militarythen noted that joining his group meant swearing an oath to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Other militias simply pasted Rhodess 10 orders on their websites without attribution.Videoscirculatedof uniformed police officers calling the lockdown measures tyrannical, emphasizing their oaths, and telling their fellow officers to wake up.

Then the Black Lives Matter protests erupted. Armed men surfaced amid the unrest, carrying out Ferguson-style operations. Rhodes tried to organize vigilante teams of his own on the social-networking site Discord, but he made little progress before the forum he created was shut down and the participants banned.

Newer groups were calling openly for civil war, saying they wanted to get on with it already. Members of the so-calledboogaloo movementwore aloha shirts when they appeared in the crowds with semiautomatic weapons, suggesting that they saw the outbreak of violence as something like a party. Many in the new generation dismissed older leaders like Rhodes as too tame. On gun rights and other issues, they resented their forebears for giving up so much already.

The moment lacked the clarity of the era in which Rhodes had gained prominence, when Patriot groups positioned themselves against Obama and the federal government. Some boog bois were white supremacists. Yet when police tried to separate the protesters into opposing sides, some of the young men in aloha shirts insisted on standing with Black Lives Matter. There were alleged shootings by white supremacists and also by people whod come out to protest against police brutality. Patriot groups became obsessed with a new Black militia called the Not Fucking Around Coalition; the two sidesconfronted each otherat a march honoring Breonna Taylor, and police had to intervene. Sales of guns and ammo were surging.

One afternoon, I received an email from an Army veteran and former Oath Keeper named Adam Boyle, who said hed been protecting a shopping center in Missouri with a former Marine special operator named Nick. Boyles story had the dreamlike logic of nonlinear conflict. Myself and Nick established a defensive security position in front of Pepperoni Bills Pizza, he wrote, and then protesters arrived. The duo braced themselves, detecting an agitator among the protesters, who appeared to have a knife, but the protesters drove him away. Boyle and his friend began talking with the protesters and realized that they shared some common ground.

Then a new enemy emerged: Two white men drove up, and Nick saw that they had a pistol in the car. When two Black women tried to leave, the men in the car chased after them. Nick jumped into my truck, armed himself at a low-ready with his AR-15, and we aggressively pursued the men, Boyle wrote. The men retreated, and the vigilantes embraced the rallys organizer. We had bridged a political gap and come together for a common cause of peace, Boyle wrote. I noted the almost desperate attempt to reestablish goodwilland the myriad ways the night could have turned into a catastrophe. While Rhodes was invoking the glory of Lexington Green, a grim reality could have played out in the confusion at Pepperoni Bills.

One evening inJuly,I walked into a VFW hall outside Nashville, past a bar crowded with maskless patrons and into a windowless room with a dance floor. A couple dozen people sat at tables on one side. Next to the door was a sign-in sheet that asked for the same information that appeared in the leaked files: name and contact information, what skills people could offer.

Rhodes had called the meeting as part of a new organizing push. Hed been driving around the Southattending a militia rally in Virginia one day, visiting members in North Carolina anotherand agreed to let me join him in Tennessee. He was late. Some Three Percenters sat in one corner, looking impatient. I sat with a pair of Oath Keepers in another.

One was an older man in an Australian-outback hat. The other was an Iraq War combat veteran who had recently joined the Oath Keepers. He began talking about his experience overseas, and how in the chaos of war, U.S. soldiers had faced the horrible prospect of killing children, who might charge at them strapped with IEDs. I prefer that to the alternative, the man in the hat said, of being splattered against the wall.

Finally Rhodes walked in and put his dusty Oath Keepers hat on a table. Why are you all sitting so far apart? he asked. Lets get everyone together.

Rhodes spoke like an errant professor, intent on explaining an idea: that its the people themselves, not any one group, who are the real militia. This, he said, was what the Founders had had in mind. He suggested that the attendees organize locally. The Oath Keepers would act like the Special Forces do overseas, training people and serving as a force multiplier. Dont call yourselves Oath Keepers or Three Percenters, he said. Call yourselves the militia of Rutherford County.

As Rhodes told the people in the crowd to be ready for war, I sized them up. Some looked hardened, but many more did not. One man rested a hand on a cane. When Rhodes asked what their concerns were, several said they feared that rioters would show up in their neighborhoods.

His comments became more inflammatory as he began to warn about antifa and protesters. They are insurrectionists, and we have to suppress that insurrection, he said. Eventually theyre going to be using IEDs.

Us old vets and younger ones are going to end up having to kill these young kids, he concluded. And theyre going to die believing they were fighting Nazis.

Afterward, Rhodes traveled through Kentucky, meeting Oath Keepers at their homes, where the conversations stretched for hours, always winding around the same questionwhat if?and always coming back to the election. A man named James, a new member, told me people would accept the resultas long as we believe the vote was fair. And if both sides cant come to an agreement, then youre going to have a conflict.

It could start with a protest gone wrong, he said, or shots from a provocateur. Someone mentioned a young mother in Indiana whod been shot and killed after reportedly shouting All lives matter during an argument with strangers.

We talk about being attacked, another man said. Now, I have a question. What if youre attacked in subtle and consistent ways over a period of time?

I drove fromKentucky into the mountains of Carroll County, Virginia, and, in a field along a winding road, parked at the end of a long row of pickup trucks and SUVs. A hundred people, most of them armed, were looking up at a man giving a speech from the back of a flatbed truck that was painted in camouflage. Between the crowd and me were two young men with semiautomatic rifles. They stopped me in a mannerneither friendly nor unfriendlythat Id encountered at checkpoints in other parts of the world.

So-called militia musters like this one had been quietly happening all over the state. The legislature was still pushing ahead with gun-control measures, and people were preparing for the possibility of more riots, and for the election. Rhodes was scheduled to give remarks but, as usual, he was late.

One of the young men said something into a walkie-talkie, and a muscular Iraq War veteran named Will joined me and explained the reason for the guards and the men posted in the woods on the far side of the field. They werent worried about law enforcementa deputy from the sheriffs department stood not far from me, leaning against his cruiser. It was leftists, antifa, who might record your license plate, dox you, show up at your home.

This was a different kind of crowd than Rhodes had drawn to the VFW hall. Many were in their 20s and 30s and had come in uniformssome Three Percenters wore black Tshirts and camouflage pants, and members of another group stood together in matching woodland fatigues. From the latter, a man climbed onto the flatbed and introduced himself as Joe Klemm, the leader of a new militia called the Ridge Runners.

He was a 29-year-old former marine and spoke with a boom that brought the crowd to attention. Ive seen this coming since I was in the military, he said. For far too long, weve given a little bit here and there in the interest of peace. But I will tell you that peace is not that sweet. Life is not that dear. Id rather die than not live free.

Hoo-ah, some people cheered.

Its going to change in November, Klemm continued. I follow the Constitution. We demand that the rest of you do the same. We demand that our police officers do the same. Were going to make these people fear us again. We should have been shooting a long time ago instead of standing off to the side.

Are you willing to lose your lives? he asked. Are you willing to lose the lives of your loved onesmaybe see one of your loved ones ripped apart right next to you?

After he finished, Rhodes rolled up in his rented Dodge Ram and parked in the grass beside me. He walked to the flatbed but didnt climb it. Then he turned and faced the crowd. His speech meandered back to revolutionary times, evoking the traditions of a country founded in bloodshed. He urged them to build a militia for their community.

Rhodes stayed at the muster long after most people had left, meeting every last person, his history lessons stretching on and on. Eventually the conversation turned to the problems in the areathe drug overdoses and mental-health crises and the desperate state of the local economy. The people there seemed to believe that taking up arms would somehow stave off the countrys unraveling rather than speed it along.

When the protests erupted in Kenosha a month later, many of the demonstrators brought guns, and vigilante groups quickly formed on the other side. They called themselves the Kenosha Guard. There was a confrontation near a gas station like the one at Pepperoni Bills, and a teenager allegedly opened fire and killed two people. A man affiliated with antifa allegedly gunned down a Trump supporter in Portland later that week, and Rhodes declared that the first shot has been fired.

By then, some writers popular on the militant right had been warning that wars dont always start with a clear, decisive eventan attack, a coup, an invasionand that you might not realize youre in one until its under way. Civil conflict is gradual. The path to it, I thought, might begin with brooding over it. It could start with opening your mind.

This article appears in the November 2020 print edition with the headline Civil War Is Here, Right Now.

This story was originally published by The Atlantic. Sign up for their newsletter.

Visit link:
A Pro-Trump Militant Group Has Recruited Thousands of Police, Soldiers, and Veterans - Defense One

The Circuitous Politics of Cool: An Interview with Andrew Martin – lareviewofbooks

OCTOBER 4, 2020

ANDREW MARTINS NEW COLLECTION, Cool for America, widens the purview of his work to include children with startlingly wrought interior lives, young marrieds struggling with parenting and alcohol, and a straitlaced businessman grappling with the phenomenon of pony boys. His debut novel, Early Work, garnered high praise for its wry yet winning humor, as well as a sharply drawn female protagonist, Leslie, who also appears in Cool.

Early Work addresses the insular middle-class ether its characters fumble through, most pointedly in a discussion of white appreciation of rap and latent racism. Now amid economic uncertainty, global health crisis, and the hopeful political force of Black Lives Matter, Martin maintains a light touch. A sobering undercurrent runs through Cool, as if the author were contemplating the end of his characters prolonged adolescence.

Martin and I met via Zoom to discuss the new release, how and when to write violence, punk shows as a rite of passage, the influence of Philip Roth, and whats in store next for the young journalist turned novelist. Martins appearance on my computer screen was personable and unassuming, our conversation almost as natural as talking over a beer at a neighborhood bar.

SARAH COZORT: Your new collection, Cool for America, establishes a world across your work, as characters from your first book, Early Work, show up in this collection.

ANDREW MARTIN: I think of these stories as parts of a larger work. The collections structure has a lot to do with the way that people Ive known, in their 20s and early 30s, are different versions of themselves in different places. Even within the span of a few months or a year, you change a lot during that time in your life.

For instance, Leslie shows up in three different stories in the new collection, but shes a different version of herself in New York, where shes a minor character to that narrator, whereas in Montana, she plays the lead role. I wrote many of these stories simultaneously with the novel, though it was very rarely the case that things from the novel migrated to the stories or vice versa. It was more that some of the stories inspired the novel, and then the novel inspired more stories.

You mention Maughams The Razors Edge in one of your stories, which is a brilliant but failed attempt to subvert the hero narrative. In that novel, the protagonist, Larry, rejects Western ideology for an Eastern-influenced strain of asceticism but, eventually, attempts to be a savior to a woman. Are you thinking of this narrative arc as you write?

Yes! Its very conscious the Maugham in that story, and versions of that narrative in general.

Its at its most self-conscious in the novel, because its about this guy whos memorized all of these quest narratives. The narrative for our generation, really one generation back, but we inherited it, was Kerouac and Hunter S. Thompson sort of tough guys who are sensitive, in their way, do lots of drugs, have sex with lots of people, and somehow achieve some kind of knowledge or enlightenment at the end. Peter thinks you go and do all this stuff and at the end, youve got a book. It just appears.

The book [Early Work] is trying to complicate and subvert that, certainly. So, some of the male characters in the stories [in Cool for America] are younger versions of Peters type. Theres still hope for the protagonists in Childhood, Boyhood, Youth and Short Swoop, Long Line. Theyre having some of these revelations sooner in life than Peter. They still have time to, maybe, get it and realize people who dont look like them are humans. Women are humans.

Leslie is a female version of the adventuring hedonist we see in Kerouacs and Hunter S. Thompsons work. Shes whole, smart, relatively in control of her sexuality, and a little prone to disaster. How do you write about women? Does having two sisters help?

[Laughs.] All of those terrible conservative politicians who are like, Ive got sisters! Ive got a mother! It always means theyre about to say something horrible. That character started as a rebuke to the male version of that [adventuring character], yes. I have a lot of friends who are writers, and the most successful ones tend to be adventurous and complicated women.

Leslie was inspired in part by a wave of great books that have come out in the last decade by women, like Sheila Heti and Nell Zink, where you do have these characters who are awful, at times, and artists and kind of self-deprecating and allowed to be all these messy, weird things.

Also, though, they have their shit together on some fundamental level. Leslies not a train wreck. Shes aware of her career. Shes moving forward. Shes actually writing. The interesting difference I see between people who succeed in this world and people who dont, of either gender, is there are people who go home at the end of their day and write, and there are people who cant make that shift from living the story to writing the story.

Would you write a character theres no hope for? Someone irredeemable?

I think I will. Ive known some. We all have, but I think of myself as part of this Grace Paley and Lorrie Moore tradition. Obviously people are terrible in those stories, but theyre guided by the Paley principle, everyone deserves the open destiny of life, even fictional characters. I have a character somewhere who goes, Maybe thats just an excuse for letting people off the hook.

I wonder if it takes a certain kind of courage to display characters who are doing terrible damage to people that cant be easily fixed. Theres a friend of mine who I think does that very well, Lee Clay Johnson, and his stories are very violent. His book [Nitro Mountain] scared me and made me wonder if Id be able to write about people like that.

Violence and injury do show up in your work. In Cool for America, the injury sets the stage, whereas No Cops, With the Christopher Kids, and Deep Cut, build to a violent end, but the violence doesnt change much of anything. Its never deus ex machina.

Deep Cut was just published separately in The Atlantic, and for some reason that finally made me take notice that I have four stories in the collection that revolve around injuries or violence.

On one level, its symbolic. Theres this physical act of reckoning that takes characters out of their head and into the physical world. These are cerebral characters who are constantly living with their own thoughts, with anxieties, in their swirling consternation, and then they suddenly have to respond. At the end of No Cops theres an actual fight, and Leslie has to decide whether to take action. In Cool for America, there are consequences to the decision to let a relationship build. So, I do hope this violence is serving a purpose, and is not a) gratuitous, or b) a sort of deus ex machina.

Speaking of Deep Cut, injury in the context of a rowdy punk show seems like a relatively benign rite of passage, unlike violence or injury elsewhere in the collection.

Right? Its obviously not entirely safe to be passed around [overhead] by strangers and, like, get elbowed in the face, but in that space it seemed understood that this was a contact sport, and you were going to help other people. Kind of like anarchy in the best way.

At the end of No Cops, Leslie watches a bar fight unfold. The last line of that story is, It was a first draft. Immediately, I thought of Didions Slouching Towards Bethlehem, when she sees that five-year-old in the Haight on acid. In the documentary about her, shes asked how she felt witnessing that, and she responds, It was gold. What are your thoughts about this tension in the writer between voyeur and witness?

Ive grappled with this a lot. As a citizen. As a person. As an undergrad at Columbia, I worked for the student paper, which was a daily, and journalistic objectivity was hammered into us. You have to be ruthless, and you have to be willing to report on what you see, regardless of your politics or sense of right or wrong. There was a preview during that time of what were seeing now massive protests and hunger strikes. We were on Fox News all the time. Students would shout down right-wing speakers who would come to campus. Through all of this, the journalist couldnt take an opinion.

Now, were in a moment where journalists are thinking, What is my obligation to my community, What is my response to the history of racism and oppression in this country, and, How can we help fix these problems while also maintaining the principles of journalism?

Theres an essay by William Kittredge, who was friends with Raymond Carver and that world of Pacific Northwest writers of the 70s and 80s. Hes writing about Carvers mistreatment of the people around him, I think, and he says something like, I used to think that the work justified everything. Now, I know nothing justifies anything. You have to try to be a good person in the world, in other words, as well as a good writer. Somehow you have to reconcile these things. No Cops is a little bit about that. I think a lot of my work is.

You approach vital but divisive topics, such as how the homeless are treated, but it never feels didactic.

Ive been thinking about No Cops as Ive been marching in the streets [of Brooklyn] denouncing the police in my minor, timid way. One of the central questions of the story is whether or not its ever okay to call the police, more or less, and theres a down-and-out alcoholic at the center of the story who prompts these questions. And now I live next door to a police station, and theres a guy in pretty rough shape who shares the block with them, with me. And so we all do this dance around each other. Can I be of some help to this person? Is it safe for him to be here on the stoop next to the police station? That story was originally drafted five or six years ago, and its about Missoula. But its funny how it feels relevant right now.

One of the more recent stories in the collection is Attention. It takes me so long to write anything, so thats one of the first stories thats caught up, somewhat, to the current moment. Its grappling with how to be a person in the world during this evil and mind-breaking administration.

But its really hard to keep up. I lived in Charlottesville for years and moved away in the summer of 2016. On the day that I was finishing a final edit on Early Work, in Boston, the murderous right-wing rally in Charlottesville happened. It was so hard to reconcile the slow pace of fiction with what was going on in the world. I tried to jam in references to Trump and the alt-right, but ultimately, except for one oblique sentence, I removed all reference to those events from the book. They werent organic to the work. It just wasnt the place for it. I guess I try to have faith that if you are writing from a real place, your politics will come through.

In Attention, two characters are in bed together, and one asks the other if she thinks there will be a revolution. This discussion struck me as true to many young peoples private experiences in the last few years.

I lived in Boston during the first stretch of the Trump administration. Because of who happened to be there and what was happening, I fell in with the serious socialist crowd, with whom Id long been a fellow traveler, if never, you know, particularly active. I was an artist, you know cant get too bogged down in tactical details.

I do think that one of the things about being super ideological, which Ive become, most of the time, is you can lose the ability to see yourself or your cohort outside of your narrow political aperture. This is all to say I think a lot about writing about this sort of insular world of left-wing politics, but it would probably get me denounced by all of my comrades. [Laughs.]

I know Iris Murdoch writes about factions of the left in Britain. Do other models come to mind?

The Golden Notebook is the best thing Ive read about factions of leftism. Its all about whether to stay in the Communist Party in the 50s after the revelations about Stalin. My friend Caleb Crain just wrote a great book called Overthrow thats about the fallout from Occupy Wall Street. Its about these characters dealing with their legal cases after they hack a government database.

My partner, Laura, whos a diehard Henry Jamesian, said The Princess Casamassima was the best thing shes read about the debates between the upper bourgeoisie, who want to be involved politically, and the actual revolutionaries. She said its the best book about radical chic.

A passage in Attention seems to describe Trump but doesnt name him. You make this move elsewhere in the collection with Amazon and, in Early Work, with Jim Jarmuschs Only Lovers Left Alive. Can you speak to the choice to be explicit or merely describe?

Theres a lot I dislike about my work, but the thing I do like about it is its clarity. Often, that does seem to mean using proper names, so more often than not I will name musicians, or books, or politicians. Sometimes, in MFA programs, students are told not to have too many references like, What if people dont know who Kendrick Lamar is in 10 years? To which I say, They can Google it, because we all live in the future.

But, particularly with things like Trump and Amazon things that on some level I dont want to give the satisfaction of preserving in print there will be more terrible leaders and other monolithic corporate entities that treat their workers terribly, who promise everything and deliver nothing. So, not naming is making a bet, or maybe a wish, that the current version wont last. Also, it can just be fun to force the reader to think it through.

Im occasionally reminded of Philip Roth when reading your work, especially when youre writing in first person.

Roths voice across his work has had a big influence on me. His writing tends to have a spoken quality, argumentative and erudite but always clear, rarely using words that the average person would have any trouble understanding. He does a kind of realism that is stagier than it looks at first glance. His people give speeches and have debates that are more eloquent, and go on for far longer, than real conversation, but he creates structures in which this feels natural.

Can you tell me about the process of deciding which stories made it into the book?

At one point my agent suggested I write a story that would demonstrate my range think the Viking story in [Wells Towers] Everything Ravaged, Everything Burned and I turned around and wrotea story about a book club made up of twentysomethings that meets in Brooklyn. So maybe range isnt in my repertoire right now! Theres one story I cut about a wild stepbrother visiting Missoula for a long weekend that I have a lot of affection for. Its kind of a classic B-side situation. If FSG ever puts out a rare and unreleased comp, thats where it belongs.

Youve talked about your desire to write a multigenerational book tapping into your own familys story.

[Laughs.] Whered I say that?

Is that true?

Yes, thats true.

How are you approaching that work differently?

Its hard. Ive been writing about a young woman trying to write a multigenerational Armenian family saga. Shes doing research into the Armenian Genocide and unable to sleep, because the material is so horrible. For me, the instinct is to take a slightly meta approach.

I do need to be a little less antic and find new ways of working to get at the meat of life. My tendency is to undercut everything with a joke. Cool for America is serious, and a few stories are not funny at all, but I often feel the best route to a point is through humor.

Lets talk about the cover! What is that?

[Laughs.] That is the question.

Its Mount Rushmore, but is it a sand sculpture? Concrete?

The photograph was taken by a Brooklyn-based artist, Jason Fulford, and it looks like a madman recreated Mount Rushmore in their backyard. When I saw it, I thought, What could better capture America? Im sure Ill be asked about it again, so I should probably make up a story. My uncle Jim built this in his backyard, and now hes buried under it. Thats pretty good, right?

Sarah Cozorts work has appeared in Barely South, The Nashville Scene, LARB, and the Academy of American Poets (online), among other publications. Her scholarly work focuses on use of creative-writing pedagogy in the first-year composition classroom, writing studies labor, and narratology of birth work.

Original post:
The Circuitous Politics of Cool: An Interview with Andrew Martin - lareviewofbooks