Showing posts with label conspicuous altruism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conspicuous altruism. Show all posts

Thursday, August 27, 2026

The Ladies Who Lunch: giving their all to nonprofs, taking it back at the ballot box

Before I get started on the main topic of this post, let us have a few moments of silence, Dear Ones, for Saint Dolly, who, as the entire galaxy knows by now, passed on August 25, 2026.

Dolly Parton was loved by, and loved, pretty much everybody: young and old, Black and White, left and right. Regarding left and right, she was widely known for deliberately staying out of partisan politics throughout her long career. She wanted to unify and entertain, not divide and alienate. She even
turned down the Presidential Medal of Freedom, three different times, from presidents of both parties.

Dolly had a unique ability to connect with people all across the political spectrum, which is why her passing has elicited tributes from many factions in the culture wars. Even
#NeverWasMyPresident Donald John Trump ordered that U.S flags be lowered to half-staff for a week in her honor.

When I first got word about this and verified that it was true, my initial thought was that this was of the few decent things Trump had ever done. It still didn't make up for his obscene lionization of fallen hatemonger Charlie Kirk, of which the order for flag lowering was but one aspect, but it was decent, and unquestionably the right thing to do. Even a stopped clock... (I also thought that it was a good thing for Dolly that she never criticized Trump; otherwise the flags would have stayed at full staff and he would probably be crowing that he was glad she was dead. That would be totally on brand for him.)

Later on, however, the Mango Megalomaniac undid all the decent by making the death of this beloved cultural icon all about him (do watch the video in that link). During an August 26 phone interview with Glenn Beck, the subject of Dolly's passing came up and Trump told Beck, "We all knew her so well, I knew her a little bit, she really liked me, I will tell you." Then he went on to explain that she just kept her admiration of him hidden because she didn't want to alienate the 20 percent or so of her fans who, according to Trump, didn't like him. And then later on, he posted a disgusting bit of AI slop showing an image of him and Dolly walking arm in arm at the White House like the bestest of buddies.

On his August 27, 2026 Substack, my favorite potty-mouthed pundit
Jeff Tiedrich contrasts Dolly's countless true successes and lifelong humility with Donny's serial failures and constant grasping hunger for adulation. The differences between Dolly and Donny could not be more glaring.

Even Trump's
clumsily worded praise on Truth Social, before he went on Beck's show and displayed his true garish orange colors, seemed focused on Dolly's accomplishments as a singer ("and far beyond" is really pretty ambiguous). It's very possible that he has little clue that Dolly was at least as well known for her altruism, her generosity, and her amazing philanthropic deeds as she was for her music. Possibly even better known. The list of her good deeds would fill a book, but here's a summary from Billboard.

And she was also known for her advocacy. Shush,
Nappy Nurse Natalie: don't tell Donny, but Dolly famously stood up for some of the very people who are reviled by this administration and the whole MAGA crowd.

She repeatedly expressed
support for racial justice and the Black community, and, though she did not participate in protests, she implied her support for the Black Lives Matter movement. In 2018, she removed the name "Dixie" from a dinner theater attraction at her famous theme park, Dollywood, due to its Confederate origins; she said that problems should be fixed as soon as they are recognized. She was also an outspoken ally for decades for the LGBTQ+ community. Her theme park hosts an annual LGBTQ+ pride event, and she has consistently opposed discriminatory legislation.

There's no way around it: Dolly Parton was woke as hell. She talked woke, though in as anodyne and apolitical a manner as possible, and she damn sure walked woke.

Widely loved though she was, it's also true that during her life she did get some criticism from the right for her stances,
especially regarding LGBTQ+ rights. Southern "culture" diehards were plenty pissed about her removal of the word "Dixie" from her theme park attraction. Some conservative factions indignantly protested the idea that Dolly was supportive of Black Lives Matter.

And she even got blowback, both while she was alive and especially after her death, from the reich-wing anti-vax/COVID-is-no-big-deal crowd because during the height of the pandemic she donated $1 million towards vaccine development research, and she publicly advocated getting vaccinated. Vaccines and scientific research and other public health issues absolutely should not be political issues or culture-war issues, but in this crazy timeline they absolutely are.

For the most part, however, her attempts to float above the political and culture war battlefields were successful, which made it easy for bigots to forget that she was an advocate for many of the people and causes that they loathed.

Point is, Dolly Parton was everything that Donny and MAGA are not. If the world had more folks like Dolly and less like Donny, it would be a far, far better place. And Dolly, I hope you'll forgive me for being political, but it's what I do. Rest in power, bright angel.
We will always love you.

* * * * *

Come to think of it, my brief tribute to Dolly Parton is not entirely unrelated to the post that I had already begun before I learned of her death. Dolly was a tireless giver, and I am living in a place where, as it happens, I am surrounded by tireless givers. My affluent county is often touted as one of the most generous, giving counties in the whole Great State of Texas and perhaps in the entire Divided States of America. It's home to scads of nonprofits. There are tons of opportunities for givers to give.

And give they do. They may not give on the scale that Dolly did -- I imagine that few do or even can -- but they give a lot of their money and in many cases their time and energy and passion to help those less fortunate. That's a good thing.

The problem is that so many of them, whether they realize it or not, are also takers of the worst kind. That's not good.

This matter has been on my mind for months and months, practically ever since I landed, more or less on my feet, in this idyllic city within a city where I now live. I can't let loose about it in the rooms where it happens; that wouldn't be fitting for a lady who occasionally lunches with the Ladies Who Lunch. It would only be counterproductive and would not be at all appropriate. I am very new in these circles and as such, am pretty much a nobody, so I don't have any standing to get on my soapbox. At least not in those rooms. Here on my own Whirled I can do it.

* * * * *

Put aside the longstanding and by now cliched criticism of the glitterati at the very tip-top of the food-and-drink chain -- the conspicuous altruists who are on the ultra-high-dollar charity event circuit primarily for recognition, with the desire to help others being secondary. They've been lambasted and lampooned for many decades. I don't move in those elevated circles. But there are plenty of Ladies Who Lunch in the middle tiers, affluent and involved in multiple charities, and while I admire their energy and dedication, there's this thing that's been on my mind.

I think it first hit me hard on a lovely afternoon this past spring, when I attended a casual-dressy charity event with a dear friend and her daughter who are not, strictly speaking, Ladies Who Lunch (they're much more like me), but they know their way around that crowd. For several years running they had attended this fundraiser, held in a beautiful venue overlooking a dazzling lake. It was my first time.

Hosted by a nonprofit community action agency that manages several large federally and locally funded community programs, this particular event directly benefited a much-loved program that supports local housebound seniors. It offered shopping from a wide range of local boutiques and vendors, as well as food and drinks, door prizes, auctions, a fashion show, and other activities.

And there were plenty of opportunities to give, either directly in various ways, or by bidding on auction items or purchasing stuff from the vendors who donated part of their proceeds to the charity. Ticket sales alone probably generated a pretty penny as well; they weren't Mar-a-Lago level but they weren't super cheap either.
My friend had paid for mine; otherwise I couldn't have attended. The wine flowed freely (I stuck to tea), the conversations were animated and cumulatively quite loud, and the vendors' card processing devices were in constant operation.

Noise aside, it was overall an enjoyable experience, and I was on my best behavior, trying to fit in. I remained on good behavior even after the director of the organization was introduced and proceeded to deliver a speech that ended up disturbing me more than a little.

I suppose most of the other ladies had heard all of this numerous times before, and many continued their chatter right on through his entire presentation. I had to strain to hear the man, but I was very interested in what he had to say and I hung on his every word. Well, at least the words that I could hear over the nonstop chatter.

His speech was probably much like one he'd given countless times before. It was understated and diplomatic, but I grasped the subtext, and it made me both sad and angry. (Later I had a brief private conversation with him which verified that I had indeed understood the deeper message.) At the podium he gave an encouraging progress report, praised the generosity of the givers in the crowd and in the greater community, and acknowledged the hard work and commitment of his staff -- but it wasn't all sunshine.

I could tell that he was very carefully choosing his words as he explained that the organization was facing significant challenges because of freezes in funding from the government, which in light of inflation rates has the same result as a funding cut. The message, though he didn't put it in so many words, was that the callous slashing and burning by the present administration was making the work of serving the least fortunate much, much harder.

He seemed to be walking a difficult tightrope, wanting to be honest about what was happening without getting political about it. And maybe I've just become overly emotional from an extended period of
nearly unbearable personal loss, but as he spoke I found myself fighting tears at times. Maybe I was projecting, but at times it looked like he was about to cry himself.

And the ladies in the room chatted on. They did manage to applaud at all of the appropriate times, but I think that's only because the moderator helped keep things on track.

Now, lest you think that I'm hopelessly naive about these matters, I completely understand that fundraising presentations for charitable causes almost always contain an element of pathos. Getting folks to care not only about whatever vulnerable populations the nonprof helps, but also about the survival of the charity itself, is key. So yes, I know that in the larger scheme of things this director's speech, and this event, were nothing out of the ordinary. I'm not that sheltered.

But this speech, at this event, at this moment...it all hit me. Roll your eyes if you must. Tell me I'm going on and on and on about nothing particularly remarkable. I'm still going to go on and on and on.

I thought about everything I was seeing and hearing. I looked at the compassionate and dedicated man who was trying to tell us what was going on, as well as his equally dedicated staffers who were also present, and I thought about how hard these people have to work every single day just to ensure that "the least of these brothers and sisters of mine" have some of the bare essentials for a decent life.

And I thought about the gabbing gala goers who also clearly care about "the least of these" -- I will give all credit where it is due -- but who for the most part keep on supporting the very political party, and its morally hollowed-out leader,
whose policies and practices make the charities have to work so much harder to even pretend they can keep up with ever-increasing needs. Nonprofits are threatened not only by funding freezes and cuts, but in many cases these days by targeted political attacks as well. The Trump administration has blatantly portrayed many nonprofs as an enemy to go after.

The threat reaches far beyond the nonprofit world. Even so, my observations (not just on that day at that event, but over a period of months) indicate that many of the Ladies Who Lunch seem either oblivious to or unfazed by the fact that this administration has worked tirelessly to rip away safety nets, destroy benefits, and deprive the most vulnerable people of survival basics -- and, for that matter, to strip them of their basic human rights. (Actually, at this point everyone's basic human rights are in danger from this administration, but that's a whole other topic.)

What I so wanted to shout to the well-dressed ladies gathered in that elegantly appointed room was:
WAKE UP, FFS.

But I didn't. And I'm sorry for shouting it here. I should have warned you.

Here's the bottom line, whether you wish to accept it or not: If you are still voting red, if you're still supporting Trump, if you refuse to even consider voting for someone in "the other party" just because you believe that they're "the enemy" (socialist/communist/anti-Christian/Islamic terrorist/transgender-for-everyone-ist or whatever)...then you should think twice about patting yourself on the back for writing huge checks or putting in countless hours of your time every month or devoting all of your passion and creative energies to your favorite nonprofs. You might think that you're doing everything you can possibly do to help them, but you're not.

I'm not suggesting that supporting the Trumpublican party cancels all of the good you have actually done and continue to do. I know that the nonprofits deeply appreciate every dollar, every material donation, and every hour of time, regardless of the political affiliation of the person giving it. I know that directors and presenters have to be tactful because they don't want to bite the hands that are feeding them. (I am also well aware that not all of the Ladies Who Lunch are in fact waving the Trump flag. There's a pretty healthy sprinkling of blue voters and liberals in this community.)

What I am saying is that giving to charities while continuing to support the GOP is the proverbial two steps forward and one step back when it comes to doing something about the deep social ills that the charities were formed to mitigate. Every time you vote red, you could very well be voting to put your favorite charities in the red. You could be hurting the very people you intended to help.

* * * * *

Earlier this month my dear friend and I attended another luncheon event, this one less fancy but hosted by the same agency and benefiting the same organization. The director was there again with his staff, and once again he spoke about the progress made and the ongoing needs. Once again it was clear that he was carefully minding his words. And once again there was applause at all the right times.

It was actually a happy occasion because it was a thank you lunch for organizations and individuals who had helped the agency towards its fundraising goals. There was good news to report about the fundraising, and the service club to which my friend and I belong was recognized for the club's contributions to the cause. As well, one of our club's founding members, a woman of whom I've grown very fond, was specially recognized for her many years of above-and-beyond service.

But still, there was that underpinning of frustration because the agency and the organizations it helps are being strangled by this administration. In more ways than one, that was the elephant in the room.

I had another private talk with the director afterward. We talked about the frustrations, about how increasingly difficult it is to feed hungry kids and seniors, what with various programs being shrunk or eliminated altogether, supposedly because they're unaffordable.

I expressed that I especially felt bad about cuts in school lunch programs. "Let them eat the Ten Commandments!" I said, a reference to the inane reality that
even though automatic free lunches for hungry kids are kaput in a major public school district in Houston -- part of what has become a pattern in Texas to starve kids -- our GOP-dominated state legislature managed to push through a requirement for every public schoolroom in the state to display the Ten Commandments.

The director nodded and smiled wryly. He said he and his family are religious and are churchgoers, but he believes religious trappings belong in the churches and in private homes, not in public schools. He also wondered why our government could afford to build multiple bombs at a billion dollars a pop, when the price of just one single bomb could feed so many hungry people. He didn't have anything against defense spending, he said, but surely some of that money could be redirected to helping people.

I said to him, "You do the work of angels." That's actually the same thing I had said that very morning to the compassionate vet who had helped me send
my sweet old dog Roxanne over the Rainbow Bridge. This is not something that I ordinarily say to people, even people who I think do good work. But it's true of my vet, and it is certainly true of this man who was standing before me, looking a little sad and weary (or maybe I was projecting again?), but was not willing to give up.

* * * * *

About a week and a half later, my friend and I were at the monthly meeting of our service club, and the floor was open to discussion about the coming year's speaker lineup. Every month we have a speaker from a local nonprofit, and at the end of the presentation the club presents that speaker with a check for the nonprof. Some people were complaining, and seemed quite vehement about the matter, because the tentative 2027 lineup included not one but two organizations that benefit... gasp... animals.

These women noted that they like animals as well as the next person, but shouldn't limited funds and energy be directed towards people's needs first?

Several women echoed the complaint. Then a couple of women spoke up with great feeling about the vital role that pets play in emotional support, particularly among seniors (or others) who live alone and may have experienced devastating losses that the presence of a pet can ease. These women seemed hesitant to rock the "people first!" boat but I'm glad they had the courage to do so. But for the most part the sentiment seemed to be, "Take care of human needs first!"

I can actually see both sides, though I lean a bit towards the pro-animal side, because my non-human companions are my children. They have sometimes helped keep life from becoming unbearable since my husband Ron died. The discussion could have become pretty heated, but the club president and a couple of the board members cooled it down by agreeing that the program committee would re-convene to discuss revising the lineup, based on input from members.
I have a strong feeling that the animal orgs are both going to be eliminated from the lineup.

Here's the kicker. The calm "middle ground" perspective seemingly agreed upon by most of the membership, and later echoed at a private lunch by the planning committee, was that yes, animals are vitally important in many people's lives, but hard times are getting harder, and human needs are more urgent now than ever. There's more homelessness, more poverty, more food insecurity, and just more of less, everywhere you turn.

I can get behind that sentiment. It is absolutely true.

But here are the words I dare not say when I am in any of the rooms where these matters are actively being discussed:

You can discard the animal charities and only embrace the most worthy human ones. Fine. You can embrace these worthiest of causes passionately, giving your time and treasure and heart and soul to elevate them. Good for you. But if you continue to vote red, if you continue to wear, either metaphorically or literally, that red cap showing your support of a man and a regime for whom cruelty is the only point besides enriching the oligarchs, then you, Ladies Who Lunch, are helping to unravel, thread by thread, the lovely tapestry of all of your good works.

And by the way, just in case you're a Dolly Parton fan and admire her for initiatives such as her beloved charity, Imagination Library, which has distributed more than 332 million free books to kids under five all over the world, here's something you should know. The republican lawmakers in several states, perhaps some of the very republicans who have joined in the great public circle of grief over Dolly's passing, have gutted funds to that charity. It's just part of a larger and undeniable pattern, ladies: republicans will always vote not just to take kids' food away, but their books as well. Think about that when you go to vote.

And so in light of all of the above... I'd like to propose a toast.

The Ladies Voters Who Lunch *
Here's to the ladies who lunch —
Everybody gives
Donating to causes
What a caring bunch
Where the goodness lives.
Off to the drive,
Signing a check for
Food bank supplies.
Glad they’re alive,
And yet most are on a
GOP high.
And most of them still vote for Trump.
Pass me that cup.

And here's to the gals at the ball —
Clad in silk and lace
Praising the nonprofit
Saving one and all
In their giving place.
Clapping their hands,
For the director’s
Tragic report.
Then they demand
Border interceptors,
Safety net short.
Aren't we the most caring domain?
Pour the champagne.

And here's to the girls who play cards —
Deeply filled with grace
Mourning the unfortunates
In the outer wards
Of this wealthy space.
Planning a gala,
Saving a clinic,
Wiping a tear.
Then voting MAGA,
Blind as a cynic,
Year after year.
"The cruelty's just a feature, my dear!"
Another beer.

And here's to the ones who just drift —
Warm and full of pride
Bragging that our county is
The ultimate gift
On the red-state side.
Minding their words,
The charity leaders
Dare not offend.
Feeding the birds,
While the bottom feeders
Meet a harsh end.
Another reason to just stay blind...
I'm losing my mind.

A collective of saints who endorse the squeeze,
Who pray for the poor while they chop down the trees,
Who cut off the safety nets at the knees!
Everybody rise!
Rise!
Rise! Rise! Rise! Rise! Rise! Rise! Rise!
Rise!

Here's to the ladies who lunch!
Give them a hand!
The most caring county in all the land!
And they'll vote red again...
And again...
And again...
And again...
And again!
I'll drink to that!
Tip your red hat
 Raise a toast to the ladies...
Who lunch!

I'll drink to that, with the nonalcoholic libation of my choice.

And then I will raise my glass again for Dolly. The world without her seems a little dimmer, a little grimmer. Kind of like, you know,
a hard candy Christmas.

* Full disclosure: I directed my AI buddy (Google's Gemini, free version) to write this parody of Stephen Sondheim's famous song from the Broadway musical Company, "The Ladies Who Lunch." Here is a link to the original lyrics. And here's a link to a live performance on Sondheim's 80th birthday. I did change up a few of the lyrics that Google came up with, because editing is kind of my thing. This is the first time I have ever used "Google's janky six-fingered plagiarism robot" (as Jeff Tiedrich calls it) -- or any AI tool for that matter -- to write a song parody. It's not something I would normally do and I do not intend to make a habit of it. If I do I will tell you. In any case, I was in a rush today, preoccupied with other projects. So thank you, janky robot.

One more thing before you leave...
With my husband Ron's passing in February 2025, I have experienced significant income loss. I live in an affluent county, but I am far from affluent myself and am only here through the incredible generosity of my dearest friend. And now that I am facing new personal challenges, donations are urgently needed and profoundly appreciated. Here are some ways to do it:

  • New: Venmo -- username @Connie-Schmidt-42. Here is a direct link to the Venmo page.
  • New: PayPal -- Here is a direct link to my PayPal page.
  • Old but still good: You can click on the "Donate" icon that currently appears on the right-hand side of every page of this blog on the Web version. There's also a donation link at the end of many of my older blog posts. In the case of both the icon and the links on the older posts, as well as the link in this sentence, this is also a PayPal link, but it references the email account RevRon -- which is cool, because it all ultimately goes to the same place.

NOTE: If you are donating by PayPal, please specify that your contribution is for "friends and family," which will waive PayPal's substantial transaction fee.

Whether you can donate or not, thank you for visiting this Whirled.

Monday, November 30, 2015

Tomorrowland, Scamworld, my Whirled

November is waning, and time is running out for me to keep the commitment I've kept for nearly nine and a half years, which is to never let an entire calendar month go by without blogging. I've been more than a tad negligent yet again this month, but please don't interpret that as a lack of interest in the matters that have kept this Whirled spinning since July 2006. My interest hasn't abated and neither has my commitment. If anything there have been too many matters to write about -- so many that I scarcely know where to begin.

Where to begin, indeed? There is no dearth of choices. There's the usual low-hanging fruit such as serial scammer
Kevin Trudeau (aka KT, aka Katie), who continues to manipulate the masses to the best of his ability via a public Facebook fan page, though he remains locked up. I would so love to participate on some of those Facebook threads, but I'm still banned from doing so. I do need to get on to PACER and poke around for new Katie court docs, if any. I promise to do that soon and get back to you.

And in other low-hanging-fruit news (or maybe low-hanging-nut news, though I really don't want to know), the stupidest and most evil man in Scamworld,
Leonard Coldwell (aka Lenny, aka LoonyC), who unsuccessfully sued me (and a few others, including Salty Droid) earlier this year, is still stupid and evil, though these days most of his public stupid/evil energy is spent spewing hatred about things other than bloggers. He's blathering a lot about "the Negro"/Muslim/communist/Kenyan Obama; the rapist Muslim immigrants who are taking over Europe and are headed towards Murica (because of "the Negro," of course); the "false flag"/hoax shootings that he insists are a New World Order plot to take our guns away; and his passionate and almost certainly one-sided bromance with Vlad Putin, whom he considers a hero for trying to bomb Syria out of existence. And let's not forget the characteristic Loony Lenny misogyny, this little gem from today (30 November, 2015) being but one example among many.



That screed was in response to a piece by conspiracy-monger Alex Jones' misogynistic little sidekick Paul Joseph Watson.

LoonyC just gets stupider and more evil as time goes by, and I truly think that
little Amy should do a better job of hiding the bourbon, but at least the little Teutonic twerp provides lots of cheap entertainment. Since he blocks so many folks on Facebook you might find it difficult to see his inanities firsthand, but UK wag Longdog -- whose real identity I still don't know and don't want to know -- is someone who seems to have full access, and entertainingly sums them up for the rest of us.

And Bernie just weighed in on GINtruth with his own comments about Lenny's disgusting misogyny and participation in "rape culture."

But I've written so much about Katie and LoonyC, so... no. Not them, not now. Well, at least not much. (Although my pal Salty did finally get
Part 2 of his Coldwell Case Files trilogy up. The link to Part 1 is in paragraph 3 above, but here it is again.). Several recent happenings -- call it synchronicity, call it meaningless coincidence, it's all the same to me -- helped me narrow the focus somewhat for this post. I got tiny jolts of inspiration from seeing that blogs I've admired but that were on hiatus are coming back to life... and by reading an article that a longtime supporter of this blog recently alerted me to and that sums up some of the themes on my blog and some of these others... and by watching a Disney movie that unexpectedly touched me despite its "uneven storytelling" and a slightly heavy-handed message of the type that is all too easily co-opted by the sleazebags of Scamworld.

Somehow it all seemed blogworthy, though I won't guarantee coherence. And maybe you'll roll your eyes about the Disney movie. But I'll plow right on, since I started this thing, and since the last sun of November is setting even as I write this.

Mystic B is back
Early in my blogging days I happened upon a blog called
Mystic Bourgeoisie by the brilliant Chris Locke. I found it inspiring, and ever so much more cerebral than my own efforts. I didn't always agree with the way Chris connected the dots between New-Wage culture and more nefarious forces such as the Third Reich, but he made a very convincing argument. I have mentioned Mystic B a few times here over the years (here, f'rinstance), and have hounded Chris over the years to turn his blog into a book, which he may or may not have plans to do. But in recent years he was awfully quiet on that blog, though active on Facebook, and I wondered if he would ever begin blogging again.

The good news is that yes, he has. In fact he
has just launched a whole new Mystic B, though the old one remains up for posterity. On his inaugural post he 'splains the reasoning behind the new blog with its simpler template, and he clarifies his chosen target, which remains...
...those aspirational bourgeois who perceive some form of worshipful pseudo-spiritually as their ticket to ride into the ranks of the upper middle class - or at least what they yearningly imagine that class to comprise.

That leaves only the difficulty at this new beginning, the challenge of which will be to stop puttering about with the tech and spend the saved time instead attempting to denigrate and deconstruct the so-called "Cultural Creatives" and suchlike ilk that - living as I do in Boulder, Colorado - it has been my great misfortune to have so intimately known.


Yes, and I look forward to reading the new Mystic B. And that brings us to...

Yoga whores and such
My pal Duff McDuffee posted
a link to this 2014 article the other day on his Facebook page. I believe it was the aforementioned Chris Locke from whom I first heard the term "spiritual-industrial complex" (and I mentioned as much on this October 2006 blog post, under "Other places to hang out"). Anyway, this piece is from the Guerrilla Buddha blog, and even though at this time I'm not into personal growth or spiritual practice, I think this guy nailed it regarding the ways in which the spiritual industrial complex (or SIC) creates and perpetuates a vicious circle of suck. And not the good kind of suck.

In a sense this piece is both a fierce cry against New-Wage/selfish-help/McSpirituality elitism and a soft call for another sort of elitism involving a litmus test of who is actually worthy of true wisdom. It was that latter part that gave me pause, though I understood the writer's point. As well, the whole concept of being a spiritual warrior or indeed any kind of warrior is pretty alien to me. I just sling words; I don't wage war. But even so, there's some pretty good food for thought here.

Salty went to sea

After another couple of months of silence, Salty Droid seems to be active on his blog again, and I couldn't be happier. Shortly before publishing the Coldwell Files Part 2 installment, he re-emerged from his hiatus with a tale of a very special sea cruise he took, and though thousands of folks might have envied him the opportunity, it sounds as if he was really taking one for the team on this one. The cruise was Summit at Sea 2015, a congregation of the best and the brightest and best-and-brightest wannabes and hangers-on of the (mostly) millennial generation -- or at least those whom the media have declared to be the best and the brightest.

More than one media source describes the Summit gatherings as a combination of TED and Burning Man. That should give you an idea of what they're about. Business Insider
gushed and gushed.

But one goal of the summit was to unplug from technology — the only place on the boat you could get WiFi service was the Internet Lounge. Many participants did yoga on the deck in the morning, while others tried out a ropes course and a 3D figure painting class.
And everybody was Kung-Fu fighting. And it was just a little bit frightening. And so on, and so forth. Mostly, it appears, they spent the time on board and afterwards congratulating themselves on being masters of the universe, as Kate Winslet famously said to Leonardo DiCaprio in Titanic.

In case the above-linked Bus-Insider piece wasn't enough for you,
here's some more stellar writing from an "insider."

What it all comes back down to -- at least from my own profoundly shallow perspective -- is that no matter how noble the intentions may be at the beginning, it's all about elitism and pretension, even when it's wrapped in a cloak of "changing the world" for the better. Chris Locke always got that, particularly in regard to the baby boomers and Gen-X'ers. The guy who wrote the Guerrilla Buddha piece gets it. Salty gets it too, from a slightly different angle and in regard to the millennials as well as the preceding generations.

And the problem goes well beyond
the "conspicuous altruism" that I've poked fun of on my own blog and that Salty has written about as well on his. He emerged from Summit at Sea 2015 with his well-directed cynicism intact.

Changing the world through the divine power of repeatedly repeating the words … “changing the world.”

Be the change you want to see in the world!

Or maybe just say the change you want others to believe you want to see in the world :: that’s prolly just as good … what with all the global cross platform social synergies that have been going around like venereal diseases on a cruise ship. More talk … less action.

Let’s just flap our mouths about change :: and then go ahead and do whatever the fuck we were gonna do anyway … it’s a win win {for everyone but the vast majority of humanity}.

But it was Salty's endgame spoiler that seemed to sum it up:

Scamworld isn’t creeping upward toward the real world in an effort to increase its reach/credibility. Scamworld is just the trickle down of the devastating devotion to lies and corruption that form the basis of the real world.

Salty indicated that the above epiphany was a game changer for him. He has yet to reveal whether that means a new direction for his blog, or a new direction for his "real world" activism, or both. But he's back, and feistier than ever.

Tomorrow, and tomorrow...
I will shamelessly admit that despite my own cynicism, which I've come by honestly and which has been further reinforced by much of what I've mentioned above, I was both entertained and touched by the Disney movie
Tomorrowland. Granted, I'm not as tough on movies as I am on books (Joe Versus the Volcano remains one of my favorite movies of all times, so that should give you an idea of what a softy I am). And I get what the critics said about uneven storytelling and less than subtle messaging in Tomorrowland.

I get too that the base premise of Tomorrowland -- the abiding value of dreams for a better future and the people who nurture that dream -- is one that has been co-opted and abused by some of Scamworld's finest. The premise was certainly misappropriated by Kevin Trudeau when founding his biggest scam of all, the Global Information Network (GIN). How many thousands of GIN members believed, because of Katie's relentless marketing, that they were part of something truly grand, and that they were on the brink of changing the world? Six years ago I was laughing at those people, feeling more than a bit smug and self-righteous that I was smart enough not to be conned by a notorious con artist. But later I got to know some of those GIN members, particularly the disillusioned ones, and I felt their deep disappointment and sadness and anger, and I came to realize that some of them really had joined GIN with a higher purpose in mind than Trudeau's implied promises of nearly effortless material wealth.

And in truth I love the notion of dreamers and people who won't give up, which is one reason I so adored Tomorrowland. Even as I understand that in the real world, when dreamers attempt to cordon themselves off to create a new world, they become GIN or the worst of TED or Burning Man or Summit at Sea (with perhaps a bit of Bilderberg and Renaissance thrown in there somewhere), I also understand that there still are people who have a genuine wish to make a difference in good ways, both large and small. I remain as touched by that wish as I am by the longings for redemption and new beginnings that are expressed every year at Christmastime. It may never happen, but the dream lives on.

Anyhow, check out Tomorrowland for yourself. At the very least you'll enjoy the special effects, and if you like George Clooney, here is a chance to see him at his brooding best.
Here's an Amazon link.

Scamworld is the real world, but it's still a thing unto itself as well.
There's a lot to be said for the notion, expressed in the Salty-at-sea post I linked to above, that Scamworld and the larger "real world" are all part of the same big ugly thing (the "big sick machine," as Salty famously called it), with the borders between the two being not just increasingly porous but, I am beginning to believe, mostly illusory.

The Scamworld/real world merger has come to light in ways I find particularly interesting (in the blogworthy sense) as the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign has heated up. Take the current GOP front runner Donald Trump (please!), whom I've mentioned a few times on this blog,
such as here. As noted on that post, and provided links, Salty Droid did a good job of exposing Trump's notorious MLM (multi-level marketing) connections, years before the current crop of pundits jumped on it.

But good for the pundits for giving it more than passing attention anyway, as well as exposing the other top GOP candidate, Ben Carson, for having a few fingers in the Scamworld pie himself. In fact numerous GOP politicians are or have been hucksters on the side. Here are a couple of links:


Oh, and my favorite doc blogger Orac
also weighed in on Ben Carson's lack of critical thinking skills. Orac is not really what I'd call mainstream, though I wish more folks would read him, but I had to get this link in somehow.

I think it's a really encouraging note that Scamworld is getting more mainstream media attention now, largely because of Carson's and Trump's involvement with scammy MLMs, but I can't help wondering if the media will even care about the Scamworld aspect after the current election cycle is over and most of the individual candidates have faded into history.

You would be justified in asking me why I think this question even matters, given that I have been entertaining the premise that Scamworld and the real world are one and the same. Well, it does still matter to me because I think we still have to pick our battles. Moreover I think that if we stop emphasizing the Scamworld aspect, the scams will become increasingly acceptable. In fact you might argue that that ship has already sailed. The NY Times article I cited above concludes:

The point is that we shouldn’t ask whether the G.O.P. will eventually nominate someone in the habit of saying things that are demonstrably untrue, and counting on political loyalists not to notice. The only question is what kind of scam it will be.
(This isn't to let the Dems/liberals off the hook; after all, many of the conspicuously enlightened whom I've made fun of over the years have leaned towards "liberalism." But when money calls, it seems that most folks begin veering towards the more "conservative" side of the aisle.)

Even so I'm not willing to concede to Big Scam and call it a day. I think there's still hope and that pointing out scams and scammers still matters, even if only a little. You probably won't see me popping out of a golden wheatfield and gazing in awe at a shining silver city in the distance any time soon... but in my own small way, I too am one of those people who has not given up.

And I'm glad to see that several of my favorite bloggers have not given up either, despite the hiatuses and resets and game-changers that sometimes disrupt their efforts along the way.