The SCUM Manifesto is a very interesting read. the SCUM, or Society for Cutting Up Men, Manifesto is a radical feminist work that encourages women to “overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation and destroy the male sex”(p.1). The author believes that men are inherently flawed with this flaw stemming from their incomplete chromosomes. “The male is a biological accident: the Y (male) gene is an incomplete X (female) gene, that is, it has an incomplete set of chromosomes. In other words, the male is an incomplete female”(p.1). She then explains how men’s inadequacy of not being female leads them to cause various issues such as war, prejudice, and censorship. I found it particularly interesting how she describes the continuation of capitalism/work as an attempt for men to overcome this inadequacy, give himself power over women, and to give himself a purpose. She argues that most work could be automated and money made obsolete but men prevent this because of these reasons. But the part of the text that this manifesto is most well known for is the advocation for the destruction of the male sex. “Just as humans have a prior right to existence over dogs by virtue of being more highly evolved and having a superior consciousness, so women have a prior right to existence over men. The elimination of any male is, therefore, a righteous and good act, an act highly beneficial to women as well as an act of mercy” (p.12). I find this entire text to be fascinating in how unapologetic the author is in her beliefs for the destruction of men, so much so that I question if this is a work of satire similar to “A Modest proposal”. Overall, I found this text to be quite interesting and enjoyable and it might be my favorite of the texts that we have read.
Author: Cade Brown
For my research paper, I plan to answer the question, “Why does the Western political right love artificial intelligence”. From my personal anecdotal evidence, it seems the the biggest supporters and users of AI (artificial intelligence), specifically generative Ai and LLMs (large language models), tend to be members of the political right. I will be examining this relationship through prominent figures like Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Peter Thiel.
I will first establish a relationship between the political right and AI. I will then analyze some of the potential reasons for why these people and their allies might be interested in this technology. One of the most obvious advantages of using AI is the replacement of workers. AI cannot unionize or advocate for workers rights. AI images and videos are also used heavily by the right. Members of the right have historically devalued artists and creativity. AI is used to replace artists while still getting the “art”. Another aspect of the right and AI that I will explore is how it is used to accumulate capital. When AI generates wealth, it goes to very few people.
Beyond just the reasons for why the right might like AI now, I will also explore the potential future laid out by some notable right wing figures. Most notably the Techno-feudalistic future proposed by Peter Thiel.
I will use a variety of sources for this paper. I will use scholarly papers and journal articles that relate to the right and its use of AI. I also plan to use the social media of both prominent and lesser known conservatives and analyze their uses of AI, their stances on AI, and their Ideas for the future and AI. I can also use any interviews of notable right-wing figures relating to AI.
The Holocaust Memorial Museum really helps to personalize the Holocaust and realize its scale. When thinking about the Holocaust, it is easy to think of it abstractly as a historical tragedy and forget that it had real victims. Similarly, the scale is difficult to grasp; Six-million is such a large number that it is hard to wrap your head around. I think that the museum did a great job illustrating a small glimpse into the true horrors of the Holocaust.
This starts before you even enter the elevator. While in line, you are given a pamphlet that tells the story of someone who lived during the Holocaust. The person on my pamphlet was Miru Alcana. The pamphlet covers her life before and the horrors she faced during the holocaust. At the end of the pamphlet, there is a number. This number helps remind us that her tragedy was not unique and that there are millions of similar stories.
Another way that the museum shows the true devastation of the Holocaust is through the “Tower of Faces” exhibit. This was the multi-story room that was covered in over 1000 pictures. These are the photos of the Jewish people that lived in just one village that was destroyed during the holocaust. There was also additional information that shed light on the lives of some of the people in the pictures. To see so many smiling people while knowing their ultimate fate was harrowing. To see so many faces and learn their story helps to understand the true scale and tragedy of the Holocaust.
One quote that I found notable during the visit was
“There were not six million Jews murdered; there was one murder, six million times.” -Abel Herzberg
Manheim Intro:
The most interesting thing that I learned from the introduction was how bad of a writer Hitler was. The author of the introduction mentions several times how poorly Mein Kampf was written, “It is lengthy, dull, bombastic, repetitious and extremely badly written” (xi). One quote that I strongly agree with is “The result is a book tediously long, overburdened in many places with trivial details and irritatingly repetitious”(xxxi). From what I have read, this statement is true, the chapters where long and at times spent several pages saying nothing of substance. Another point that the author makes is how often Hitler lies. While the author focuses on the larger and more important lies, I also observed many times when Hitler would lie about mundane things and the footnotes would have to correct him.
Another point of interest from this introduction was why it was decided to publish it again. The author addresses potential concerns with many arguments, but I think the strongest point is to understand Hitler. As the author said, Hitler is not unique to germany; even today, there are many people whos ideologies share many similarities with Hitler’s.
Class Discussion Research:
Karl Lueger– An Austrian politician and a mayor of Vienna while Hitler lived there . He was an anti-Semite and a german nationalist. Hitler saw him as an inspiration and referred to him as the greatest German mayor.
Kulturkampf– German word meaning cultural struggle. Specifically refers to conflict between the church and state of German Catholic church and the kingdom of Prussia. The protestant chancellor wanted to control the church because he feared its influence and that it would undermine his authority.
Lebensraum– German word meaning living space. Specifically refers to the idea that Germany must expand to sustain and grow the german population. It is a similar concept to American manifest destiny. This idea lead to Germany’s many invasions during WWII.
Social Darwinism– Applying Darwinism and the survival of the fittest to society. Used by the Nazis to justify eugenics so that only the strongest can survive.
Manifest Destiny– The belief that America was destined to expand westward and span the entire continent. Inspired the German idea of Lebensraum.
Anschluss– German Annexation of Austria. Hitler sought to incorporate all ethnic Germans into a greater German state.
Judeo-Bolshevism– Anti Semitic theory that Jewish people were controlling communist movements and spreading communism.
Aryan Race– A believed “master race” descending from Proto-Indo-Europeans. They are characterized by blonde hair and blue eyes. Nazis claimed that most human advancement came from the Aryans.
Chapter 6: War Propaganda
In this chapter, Hitler explains the usefulness of war propaganda and how it should be used effectively. He also thoroughly criticizes the German propaganda during WWI and praises the enemies propaganda. He believes that the failure of old German propaganda lead to its defeat.
Hitler gives advice on how to create effective propaganda and acts as a somewhat of a marketing strategist. Some of his tips include catching attention, keeping it simple, keeping the messaging consistent, biased it towards yourself, use slogans, and play on emotions not reasoning. The footnotes mention how Hitler himself utilized repetition and brand recognition to bolster his political standing. “His was always the same pose, the same gestures, the same theme”(239-240).
I found this chapter to be quite boring and the advice on how to make effective propaganda to be basic and nothing I haven’t heard before from less reprehensible sources. But perhaps it was more revolutionary at the time. In any case Hitler and the Nazi’s propaganda did end up being effective in swaying the German populous.
Chapter 7: The Revolution
This chapter focuses on the effect that propaganda had on the german people and how it lead to Germany’s defeat. Hitler believes that this was not the result of incompetence but instead a deliberate attempt to make Germany lose “Was this failure stupidity or criminal?”(243).
He accuses the Jews of being the ones who lead Germany to defeat by making the public believe in enemy propaganda and wanting an end to the war. While the previous chapter only mentioned Jews once, this chapter focuses much more on them and mentions them directly at least ten times.
The part of this chapter that stuck out the most to me was the very end. Hitler concludes the chapter by claiming that the German Empire collapsed because the Emperor was too trusting of Jews. But he would like to go into politics to remedy this issue, “With the Jews there is no bargaining, but only the hard either or. I, however, resolved now to become a politician”(269). With the knowledge of what he did while in politics, this line is quite ominous.
Before gaining the global notoriety that it has today, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was originally intended as pro-tsarist propaganda targeted towards the Christian public of Russia. In the introduction to the text, the author makes this view clear, “The world’s last rampart and last refuge from the coming storm is Russia. Her true faith is still alive, and
the anointed Emperor still stands as her sure protector” (VI). To achieve this goal of defending and promoting the tsar, the author utilized pre-existing Russian discontent towards its jewish population.
By the time of its publishing in 1905, Russia already had a history of anti-Jewish sentiment. Jews faced discrimination, restrictions of movement, and pogroms (anti-jewish riots). In order to defend the Russian monarch, the author used this disdain to pin Jews as a scapegoat for all of the Tsar’s, and the system’s, failings. They sought to paint social change, such as liberalism, as a dangerous Jewish scheme and not necessary reform to a flawed system. The book only further incited antiemetic sentiment and lead to further pogroms.
One of the most important pieces of context of this text is that it is a fabricated text made to fuel anti semitism. While original authorship is unknown, it is believed that it was written by members of the Russian secret police. But instead of coming up with their own fake jewish scheme, the author decided to plagiarize a large portion of the book. One of the most heavily plagiarized works was “Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu” which was a political satire and did not mention Jewish people.
Although originally intended for a Russian audience, the text did not stay confined to Russia for long. It was translated into many languages, such as the copy we read, and distributed around the world. The most notable english distribution came from Henry Ford. He used his newspaper, the Dearborn Independent, to spread the text and legitimize its message. The book also made its way to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party, who used it as fuel to justify the holocaust.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is one of the most infamous examples of an anti semitic text. The work depicts itself as a real account of a meeting of Jewish leaders that are planning world domination. (The validity that this is an account of a real meeting has been disproven numerous times). During the many years since its publication, It has been spread around the globe and endorsed by various anti-Semites including Adolf Hitler and Henry Ford. Despite being over one-hundred years old, many of the conspires presented in the book are still repeated today.
The book contains many “protocols” that are laid out by the elders during the meeting on how to control the gentiles, or non-Jews. These protocols invoke many negative stereotypes of Jewish people such as them controlling the world’s finances, the press, and the government. These elders want to utilize these protocols to promote liberalism/socialism, undermine religion, and encourage materialism. The ultimate goal of these elders is control of the world through a global regime using authoritative and tyrannical rule.
The thing that most stood out to me about this text was how little anti semitic conspiracies have changed over one-hundred years. I have heard and seen many of the talking points that are featured in this book online, albeit more dressed up and not directly mentioning jews. I think this is a strong testament to the effects that text like this can have on people who haven’t even read it more than a century later.
Although it may be obvious from his work, de Sade was not a normal guy, in fact he is the name sake of “Sadism”. He was a part of the pre-revolutionary french upper class, with “Marquis” being a title for noblemen. His life was thoroughly filled with scandals and affairs, including blasphemy, sodomy, orgies, poisoning, and many other sexual deviances. Some of these scandals led to his imprisonment at various times during his life.
During one of these periods when he was imprisoned, he wrote the work we are discussing today, 120 days of Sodom. He had to write it in secrecy to not have his work confiscated. He was limited to the paper that was smuggled in, meaning that the entire book was written on a 12 meter long piece of paper. What he wrote was only an initial draft, which can be seen in the notes that he leaves throughout the book and the heavily detailed first part compared to the other parts which lack detail. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your opinion of the book) de Sade was never able to finish it because the prison he was in was looted. He believed that it was lost forever and “wept tears of blood”.
Although it was believed to be lost, it was actually taken out before the looting and kept safe. It was then passed around for many years, eventually making its way to a collector who published it in 1904. During the time when the book has been in the public view, it has faced many bannings, squarely making it a forbidden text.
Marquis de Sade described the 120 days of sodom as “The most impure tale ever written since the world began”, and I am inclined to agree with him. This was without a doubt the hardest read of any book that I have ever read.
The book follows the “unique feat of debauchery” hosted by four wealthy libertines over the course of four months in their secluded castle. These men commit debaucherous acts while following a detailed pre-planned schedule. Each month, their exploits become more vile and perverted.
One aspect of the text that I found interesting was the way that religion was incorporated. The most obvious example is that one of the four libertines was a bishop. Although he was a bishop, he does not have any faith in God and he partakes in these despicable acts because he believes that nature instructs him to give into his desires. Another way that religion was used in the story is the character of Adélaïde. When she tried to pray, they punished her severely and they took pleasure when she invoked God while being tortured. It is interesting how the author used religion and the libertines’ opposition to it to show their depravity.
Another interesting thing is the social status of the libertines and the victims. The libertines are obviously very wealthy and use this power to achieve their perverted desires. But its not only them who are wealthy, it is also the victims. I found it interesting how the author made the victims members of wealthy families.
This book was a very hard read and there were many points when I had to put it down and take a break. It is very obvious to see why this would be a forbidden text.
As I was reading the first couple of pages of “A Modest Proposal” I had nearly forgotten what class I was reading for. That quickly changed when I reached the titular proposal. Swift’s “modest proposal” to solve Ireland’s economic issues was to eat babies! He tries to support this proposal by arguing that it will provide relief from the burden of raising children, help get rid of the poor and catholic, and it will make the kingdom wealthier. I was shocked and disgusted during my initial reading due to how straightly these horrid actions were being proposed. But as I continued to read, I realized that this text was not a genuine proposal, but instead a work of satire.
When Jonathan Swift wrote this in 1729, Ireland was being oppressed under British rule. Because of this, Ireland faced famine and economic restrictions. After gaining a brief understanding of Ireland during the time when this was written, it becomes easier to see the author’s intent. This work satirizes Britain’s cruel treatment and view of the Irish people.
Although the author makes great use of satire, the most apt example is when the author compares the Irish poor to livestock while English Elite are referred to as “persons of Quality and Fortune”. The English landlords viewed their Irish workers, as not fully human, and as tools to be exploited in order to gain a profit. “very proper for Landlords , who, as they have already devoured most of the Parents, seem to have the best Title to the Children”
Although the content of “The Modest Proposal” is disturbing and upsetting, the thing that I find truly horrifying is not the text itself but what happened after. As I was writing this blog post, I had wrongly assumed that this work was in response to the Great Famine. The Great Famine lasted from 1845 to 1852 and was one of the darkest periods in Irish history, causing the deaths of one million people and forcing another million to leave the country. Originally, I thought this work was in response to that tragedy but I was horrified to discover that Irish oppression continued for over a hundred years after this work but also got significantly more devastating. Even today, a portion of Ireland is still under British control.
In the mainstream orthodoxy of Christianity, Judas is one of the most hated figures, perhaps second only to lucifer, because betrayal of Jesus. But the Gospel of Judas reframes not only Judas’ betrayal, but the entire Biblical mythology. The text begins with the disciples giving a prayer of thanksgiving, when Jesus sees this, he begins to laugh. The disciples question why he’s laughing. He responds that they are praying to praise their god. The disciples are confused because they believe Jesus is the son of their god; He refutes them by claiming that no-one among them will know him. This is a clear departure from mainstream christianity where Jesus is recognized as the son of God, the same god that the disciples are worshiping. This claim angers the disciples and he invites them to face him, they all refuse except Judas; He stands and tells Jesus that he knows who he is and where he came from. Later, the other disciples relay a vision they had to Jesus. In this vision, sinful priests invoke Jesus’ name while giving offerings. Jesus reveals that the priests in this vision are the disciples leading people astray while serving their god. Jesus then tells them that all generations of humans will die except for one, whose souls will be taken up. Judas then tells Jesus of his vision where he is being persecuted by the other disciples. Jesus tells him that although he will be cursed by the generations, he will eventually rule over them. Jesus goes on to reveal the truth about creation; he tells Judas that the invisible spirit is the true god while the rebellious Yaldabaoth is the creator of humans and the god that the disciples mistakenly worship. But Jesus laughs because Yaldabaoth and his creations will eventually be destroyed. Jesus then commands Judas to betray him, because death will set his spirit free. This text does much more than just reframing Judas’ betrayal, it recontextualizes the entire biblical mythology by posing the god of the old testament to be an illegitimate imposter.
Although nearly half of the Gospel of Mary was lost to time, it still manages to reveal a fascinating glimpse into the early days of Christianity and an alternative view of Biblical teachings that conflicts with modern day Christianity. The surviving text begin on the seventh page with Jesus discussing how all matter will ultimately return to its roots. He then goes on to discuss the nature of sin. Unlike in mainstream Christianity where sin is real and stems from disobeying God’s laws, the Gospel Mary claims that “there is no such thing as sin” and that humans produce ‘sin’ when we “act in the nature of adultery” and “love what deceives”, which ultimately leads to our undoing. In modern day Christianity, Jesus’ death is what provides freedom from sin; The Gospel of mary rejects this claim and instead states that salvation comes from one’s transformation back to humanity’s true spiritual nature. Jesus then departs and leaves his disciples to debate amongst themselves. Mary is invited to join the conversation where she reveals that Jesus gave her a vision. In this vision she witnesses a soul’s ascent to it’s final rest and how it overcame the seven powers of wrath. Some of the other disciples dispute the validity of her claims believing that her teachings are too strange and that Jesus would not reveal that knowledge to a woman. Levi comes to her defence and reprimands the disciples for attacking her. The disciples then go out to preach the words of Jesus, despite previous reservations. It is interesting to imagine a world where the Gospel of Mary made it into the biblical canon instead of being lost to history for centuries. Would mainstream Christianity be more open to women in positions in leadership? What would that mean for society at large?