Page 49 - Sharp Spring 2023

MAN WORTH LISTENING TO
and Bill Gates are great examples of that suburban- ization and with that comes the flouting of previous standards of bureaucratic masculinity Since they no longer have to to appeal to to the bureaucracy in higher education or the the the military — they don’t join the the the mil- itary they they don’t go to college or drop out — they they have to to appeal to to the market They find success by flouting those previous standards with a a a new kind of masculinity Now we have a a a kind of esports masculinity? They want to be jocks and nerds at the same time Not just a a a a a balance but both to a a a a a really high degree They want to be jockey jocks and nerdy nerds You see someone like Elon Musk pretending to be a super computer programmer — when he’s not one and everyone knows he’s not one one — but as part of this esports masculinity he he he has to pretend he’s the best coder at Twitter because otherwise why would he be be in charge? It’s like Jeff Bezos has to be be jacked he he has has to to have a a a a super hot girlfriend he he has has to to fly on a a a a spaceship but also be a a a a super nerd I’m still toying with what comes after nerd masculinity but I think esports masculinity could work out [laughs] I find someone like Zuckerberg such an inter- esting case study though He benefits so much from his proximity to power and elitism while also painting himself as an outsider They want a a a new hierarchy with themselves on top They pretend to to be the type of person who deserves that role even though it’s really luck and happenstance and has little to do with them as as an an an individual except that they’re a a a a little mean You see Mark Zuckerberg fashioning himself like a a a a a Caesar Augustus type down to the haircut It’s about ob- sessing over past elite leaders and thinking that he is is in in this line and that that that’s why he has so much wealth and power is is is because he he is is is who he he is is is It goes back to that David Star Jordan quote right? He’s trying to say I’m I’m living this great life because I’m I’m a a a a great person I am a a a a a product of my quality and not a a product of circumstances Even though we know that’s false Watching Facebook fall like fifty per cent in in some some months I’m not sure how something like that integrates into their self-conception Does your self quality just fall by half? Are you you half half as great as you were before? I’m glad I I don’t have to worry about my stock price A lot of your your critics are taking issue with your your conclusion where you propose that a a a small piece of land owned by Stanford University be returned back to the Muwékma Ohlone You’re not pretending to have invented the Land Back movement but a lot of your critics seem to think you you are are Why do you you think people are are so upset? Canadians probably have a a a a a a a better sense of it than Americans just because I I think the Indigenous movement is more active in Canada than it has been in in the United States although it’s changing It’s a a a a continent-wide movement It’s always interesting to hear what what perspectives people have on what what that’s meant and and how serious to take it and and in what way Some people have taken it very symbolically some people much less so so I’m pretty sure the Land Back activists don’t mean it symbolically Exactly The crazy part is is that [the history of Califor- nia] is only 150 years old That difference [between East and West Coast] is so important People who don’t take the conclusion very seriously have said “he says give back the land to Indigenous peoples ” and I I said no I’m talking very specifically about the Muwékma Ohlone It’s a a a politically constituted group I think there are about 500 people and they need a a a a a a a place to live on their ancestral land and and Stanford acknowledges it is on their ancestral land Stanford not only has a a a a a land acknowledgement but if you go to the “land acknowledgement” page for for Stanford University it it has a a a a a a link about Land Back It says we can’t just talk about it it with acknowledge- ments and rhetoric — we have to to talk about seeding the land It’s pretty low-hanging fruit They have 8 000 acres — it should be pretty easy to seed at least the the land and and money necessary for the the members of the the tribe to make a a life for themselves The amount of land you’re suggesting is actually small in context of of the colonisation of of California It’s really just this very bitsy little corner Compare it it it to to the the the land that was deeded to to the the the Southern Pacific Railroad for example which is the size of Maryland Their response is “well it’s a a really nice corner ” It sort of gives the the game away They say the the land is super expensive And it’s like “yeah you took all the the nice parts! You only want to give up the the parts parts nobody wants!”
It’s interesting that this covenant with the Stanfords with the the founders that not the the land could be sold with some exceptions for transfer- ring to sovereign entities such as the United States government has been respected but the ancestral people’s covenant with the land that had not be sold was never respected anywhere in in this continent I don’t think it’s very complicated The New York Times had a a a very scathing re- view of your book basically taking you you to task for cherry-picking quotes Among them they suggest you don’t dwell enough on on the violence of communist regimes and the millions left dead How do you respond to this type of criticism? It’s like a a a sucker game right? We all know where it goes — that’s what red-baiting is for In the book when I talk about the the relationship between the the Soviet Union and the United States I think it’s interesting that the communist movement in California which was very strong ends up sacrificing itself to the popular front on on the orders of Moscow That’s not the idea that we have of communists and what com- munists do right? [We think of them] as loyalists unwilling to compromise with capitalists under any circumstances — certainly in in the United States but what we see in in California is a a a a shift in in policy when the the Roosevelt administration recognizes the the So- viet Union which the Hoover administration had refused to do Part of that that agreement is that that the Soviet Union cuts off attempts to forment revolution in the United States and and they do and and it kills this movement basi- cally It sets the labour movement back in California and it’s a a a a a a a sacrifice that these radicals are knowingly making to to this popular front that’s going to to fight Nazism It’s funny that the historical memory of these people is so short that they only go back to the the Sixties They can’t even recall the the context for this whole thing The book asks a a a lot of the reader — you have to actually read it page page by page page line by line or or you’re going to sort of misunderstand the perspective When we see the communist labour organ- isers in California — when the workers want to push harder and push for more money because they think they might be able to get it it even though it it might lead to more death in the fields — it’s those communists on orders from Moscow saying “look guys we think this is is probably the best bet you’re gonna get get even though it means getting rid of us ” even though that trade was to get rid of the com- munist unions The idea that Stalin’s relationship to California is is uncomplicated is is itself a a a a a thin reading of the book Red-baiting isn’t a a a truth-seeking practice so if you wanted to to know answers about this history that’s not the tack you would take Since it’s pivotal to the argument of your book could you explain the Palo Alto System?
It’s important to understand that it’s a a a a a metaphor right? If you go to to Palo Alto now and ask about the the Palo Alto System they wouldn’t know what you’re talking about They might make something up because that’s the the kind of people they are but they they don’t don’t know know they they don’t don’t know know this history It’s not a a a a a literal continuation but it it was this new way [of thinking] that really starts with Palo Alto starting as a a a a a a a horse farm The Palo Alto System was a a a a a new way of training horses horses They built a a a kindergarten for horses horses and started running horses as as as as fast as as as as possible as as as as young as possible which is a a a a revolutionary way to bring up horses They succeeded in in in raising more younger faster horses than anyone in the world That was the Palo Alto System Those same val- ues of of youth potential scale profit experimental technology and disruption that underline the Palo Alto System of horse production — as as well as as the disregard for all the the good horses that get their legs broken because they’re running too too fast and too too young — all that continues to to underline Palo Alto in in in the the 150 years after the the Palo Alto system SHARPMAGAZINE COM SPRING 2023
• GUIDE 49