super bowl game 2024
5 things we learned from Nvidia's earnings reportDenver Mayor Mike Johnston sets off firestorm with vows to resist Trump’s mass deportation plans
Jets' Ulbrich says Rodgers 'absolutely' remains the team's starting quarterbackNone
Jaylen Brown scores 29 points before Celtics beat Timberwolves 107-105 with late defensive stand
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. (AP) — David Early scored 10 points as Radford beat Chicago State 63-48 on Monday. Early shot 3 of 6 from the field and 4 of 4 from the free-throw line for the Highlanders (5-2). Isaiah Gaines, Truth Harris and Jarvin Moss all added nine points. Jalen Forrest finished with 12 points and six rebounds for the Cougars (0-7). The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar .Support Independent Arts Journalism As an independent publication, we rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. If you value our coverage and want to support more of it, consider becoming a member today . Already a member? Sign in here. Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism for as little as $8 per month. Become a Member When the political cartoon from which the film Join or Die draws its title was first printed by Benjamin Franklin, it was a call to unite American colonists in the dual purpose of self-protection and the bloody seizure of Indigenous land. It was 1754, the beginning of the French and Indian War, which Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz describes in her book An Indigenous People’s History of the United States as “mainly a British war against the Indigenous peoples, some of whom formed alliances with the French.” The cartoon is a potent but highly malleable visual symbol that was later adopted by those fighting the British during the American Revolutionary War and, decades on, by both sides of the American Civil War. The apparent contradiction of a cartoon calling for unity being used by both sides gets at a key point in Leah Hunt-Hendrix and Astra Taylor’s 2024 book Solidarity . Early on, Hunt-Hendrix and Taylor are careful to note that the idea they’re exploring is a two-sided coin: “reactionary or counter-solidarity emphasizes given identities (usually racial, religious, class-based, or national identities) and aims to benefit a small group by excluding those who are different, transformative solidarity aspires to create systems that benefit everyone.” This book and the above documentary pair well, especially at this moment. Both explore critical aspects of what it means to come together at a time when ever more people are feeling deeply isolated and national politics have become fearsomely polarized. Get the latest art news, reviews and opinions from Hyperallergic. Daily Weekly Opportunities Join or Die is exactly what its tagline promises: “a film about why you should join a club.” But, of course, it’s about much more than that. It’s part of a cresting wave of cultural production circling around the deeply intertwined issues of loneliness, isolation, shame, divisiveness, political intransigence, staggering inequality, mis/disinformation, and the expansion and emboldening of far-right groups motivated by baldly racist, sexist, heteronormative, and xenophobic ideals. The “die” in the film’s title is not a metaphor. It is a literal invocation of statistics showing that people living in social isolation die earlier than those with stronger social bonds. The film’s pitch is straightforward: get out there and get involved in some kind of club or group. It’s the American way, they tell us using copious historical examples, and it may be the only thing that saves democracy, in addition to saving your life. The film’s protagonists are two White men who come across as middle or upper class: an elder, bearded professor (Robert Putnam, author of the incredibly influential book Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community , published in 2000) and his former student, Pete Davis (who directed the film with his sister, Rebecca Davis). The film feels very self-conscious in its attempt to present itself as well-meaning, trying hard to strike a note of apolitical affability whose tone is one of assuring audiences that these men’s earnest desire to be helpful can cause no harm. I bring up this point not because I think the protagonists’ race or class negates the message, but because there really is no such thing as an apolitical approach to talking about politics. The fact that they believed this strategy was necessary is, in my opinion, tied to the contemporary push for documentary filmmakers tackling difficult topics to be more “approachable” or lighter, to please funders and/or streamers by presenting their work as having a “broad appeal,” which often translates to content that centers White audiences while skewing generic and politically muted in tone. I also raise this point because packaging matters in our consumer-driven culture. It indicates who the filmmakers and their funders consider to be their most important audience, a notable detail when the subject matter is bringing people together. The tactics used to advance these discussions are just as significant as the discussions themselves. Tactics are, in fact, a huge piece of the interlocked issues this book and film explore. How we talk to each other about thorny topics, and what approaches we do or don’t take, have everything to do with our capacity to successfully form bonds and resolve our problems. A relevant essay on that very subject is Kelly Hayes and Mariame Kaba’s “ How Much Discomfort Is the Whole World Worth? ” While ostensibly about political organizing, the essay touches on something the Right seems to be better at publicly acknowledging than the Left: People are afraid to speak, afraid to risk presenting their ideas and feelings publicly, for fear of saying the wrong thing. The Right wraps this point in diatribes against political correctness or “wokeness,” exploiting fears to further divide everyone, but in my experience people on the Left carry their own fears of speaking and sense of isolation. When I facilitated a consciousness-raising group at the Lesbian Herstory Archives in New York earlier this year, which was intentionally multiracial, intergenerational, and trans-inclusive, I chose Hayes and Kaba’s text as our initial reading precisely because I worried about how fears and judgment might prevent us from being present and open with one another. Many expressed gratitude that it was our first shared text, a possible indication that they felt some of those anxieties themselves. We humans are primates after all. Our programming is basic — we have deeply held fears about being ostracized, so much so that when we feel we have been rejected socially, it disrupts our overall brain function . But fears around speaking are not all that keep us apart. Join or Die proves to be a useful update to Putnam’s famous book Bowling Alone because it looks more broadly at the problem. Employing extensive data, the book showed a precipitous decline in community bonds, but it focused primarily on the period from the 1960s to the late 1990s. As the film reveals, if you stretch the period of analysis back to the late 1800s, the so-called “Gilded Age” in the US, when wealth inequality had reached what was then believed to be a peak (hello soon-to-be trillionaires of the 21st century), and thousands upon thousands of immigrants were arriving in the country, you can see the beginning of a massive, decades-long increase in civic and community participation. That dramatic growth precedes the later decline discussed in the original book. A subtle but notable overlap between Join or Die and Solidarity is the work of the late Jane McAlevey. She appears as an occasional commentator in the film and Hunt-Hendrix and Taylor quote her and dedicate their book to her. A union organizer, scholar, and writer who died just this summer, McAlevey is widely respected for her practice of and writing on “ whole-worker organizing ,” which acknowledges that workers are also members of communities outside the workplace, and the realities facing those communities need to play a role in union organizing. McAlevey’s commentary in the film is most salient when the filmmakers explore critiques of Bowling Alone , particularly that Putnam neglected to acknowledge that Americans have been intentionally divided from one another. As McAlevey says in the film: “I believe a deliberate strategy of cultivating individualism begins in the early 1970s, to roll back the gains [of] the Civil Rights Movement, the Women’s Movement, and the Trade Union Movement, with a strategy of downgrading the concept of the communal and the collective, and elevating the idea that the individual is supreme. People do have less connections. What I try to argue is, it wasn’t accidental.” Following up on this point, scholar of religion Eddie S. Glaude Jr. notes the ways in which public spaces where people would be inclined to meet new connections have faced deliberate disinvestment and disregard: “After Brown v. Board of Education , and after efforts to desegregate public recreation facilities like pools and parks, you see communities actually abdicate those spaces, they leave them, and then they complain about their tax dollars being used to pay for them.” Heather McGhee’s 2021 book, The Sum of Us: What Racism Costs Everyone and How We Can Prosper Together , clearly articulates how racism and racist policies not only have divided Americans but are actually disadvantaging far more people than just the intended targets — in other words, racism is costing people of all races dearly, from student debt to limited access to decent healthcare; from attacks on voting to limited housing options, and more. One point that neither the film nor the book acknowledges is how the push toward the individual and away from solidarity among people facing similar issues is intertwined with people feeling personally responsible for their own isolation and loneliness, a painful byproduct of the false idea of meritocracies in which a person is solely responsible for their successes and failures. Our hyper-individualized society propagates the fiction that it’s an individual’s own fault that they’re alone and, accordingly, something is wrong with them. I know this because I’ve felt it, and I know others who have as well. As I’ve written elsewhere , even with all the structural analysis in the world, the feeling of being alone is tough to contend with when our society teaches us that the solution is to either turn inward or to buy stuff, neither of which will solve the problem. One secret to the success of the Right’s current message in the US is the recognition of people’s fears and isolation, offering up countless boogeymen as the cause and solution, rather than attending to the systems that are failing us all. Meanwhile, the Left hasn’t done a great job of offering a collective vision of a path out. At screenings of my own documentary about US spaces that center LGBTQ+ women, I am often asked by audience members: What groups can I join? Where can I go? The most honest answer is that you have many options, and also very few. In Join or Die , we meet a few men who we later learn are members of an Odd Fellows lodge in Waxahachie, Texas. At the end of the film, we see them laughing, hugging, and working together to improve themselves and their town. It’s precisely the kind of benevolent civic organization that Putnam boosts in his book. But the group has a few assets that a lot of other groups lack: access to a dedicated private space that they own (I cannot overemphasize the importance of this); a stated ethic of mutuality, along with a politic of nonviolence and non-discrimination; and a set of bonding rituals and traditions to embrace and carry on. It’s the kind of group that Hunt-Hendrix and Taylor might define as being engaged in transformative rather than reactionary solidarity. Many people I meet who are seeking spaces of their own are hoping for communities similar in some ways to the Odd Fellows lodge. The trouble is they often look to consumer-reliant businesses like bars and bookstores to fulfill desires that have little to do with consumption. I recently came across a series of reading events organized by Reading Rhythms , where people are asked to pay $20 to sit together and read books individually while music plays, and they can later engage in optional conversations. I’m sure these events are well-intentioned, but they illustrate how we often replicate systems that reinforce individualism over collectivity. Ultimately, participants are asked to pay a pretty high price to sit in a room and read on their own, with the possibility but no guarantee of connecting with others. To state the obvious, these events could easily be hosted for free or a nominal cost at venues like public libraries, parks, or community centers. So why aren’t they? My impression from the Reading Rhythms website is that, in addition to the practical need to pay for spaces and labor, they feel the need to brand themselves and their events in order to garner attention, sponsorships, and additional funding. Branding and an online following may also allow them to offer more desirable “experiences,” but all of this ultimately cultivates a consumer model more than it satisfies a desire for meaningful, sustained connection. So why aren’t we all pushing for more publicly controlled spaces where events can happen without the high cost and need to “sell” something? Resource- and info-sharing across loosely aligned groups, along with using and advocating for more and better local public spaces, could create avenues for meaningful involvement, civic engagement, and connection beyond handing over some cash and showing up. (An event series similar to the above called Quiet Reading seems to do some of this.) In the last essay of her collection Belonging: A Culture of Place , bell hooks writes about her rootedness in Kentucky, her family, and the models they provided for her. At one point, hooks says, “Communities of care are sustained by rituals of regard.” I think a lot about that when I’m attending yet another Zoom or in-person event where individuals lack the chance to be present with one another in any meaningful way. A few years ago I was teaching a workshop about artists and payment where I foregrounded the need for information sharing and solidarity, and an attendee asked why he should spend his limited time helping others (a genuine if telling question). Before I could stop myself I said something like: Why should anyone care about you and your work if you don’t care about them? Hunt-Hendrix and Taylor present a more tactical perspective in Solidarity : “...the twenty-first century has witnessed the biggest protests, and the most popular petitions, in history, yet they have produced comparatively small effects. ... What might have happened had a larger fraction of the tens of millions who demonstrated been channeled into member-based organizations to work toward common goals?” This is where that malleability of the Benjamin Franklin cartoon that inspired the film’s title comes back in. If so many of the events that promise collectivity are consumer-oriented or are protests without clear, ongoing organizing, there really aren’t ways for people to join these efforts beyond showing up, which, on its own, is not enough. And we know well enough at this point that groups engaged in reactionary solidarity are all too ready and willing to provide longterm connection and involvement. Invitations into and ways in which people can find a place for themselves in a group are hugely important, and anyone interested in creating a more livable and welcoming world should be considering them. Whenever I spend time thinking about this topic, the words of bell hooks echo for me: New rituals of regard are needed. Join or Die is currently streaming on Netflix. We hope you enjoyed this article! Before you keep reading, please consider supporting Hyperallergic ’s journalism during a time when independent, critical reporting is increasingly scarce. Unlike many in the art world, we are not beholden to large corporations or billionaires. Our journalism is funded by readers like you , ensuring integrity and independence in our coverage. We strive to offer trustworthy perspectives on everything from art history to contemporary art. We spotlight artist-led social movements, uncover overlooked stories, and challenge established norms to make art more inclusive and accessible. With your support, we can continue to provide global coverage without the elitism often found in art journalism. If you can, please join us as a member today . Millions rely on Hyperallergic for free, reliable information. By becoming a member, you help keep our journalism free, independent, and accessible to all. Thank you for reading. Share Copied to clipboard Mail Bluesky Threads LinkedIn Facebook
TSX Soars to Close WednesdayPPP to observe foundation day at Nishtar Park on 30th: Ghani Sindh Local Government Minister Saeed Ghani on Sunday said that a public meeting would be held at Karachi’s Nishtar Park on November 30 to mark the foundation day of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). As the PPP Karachi Division president, Ghani chaired a meeting of the party’s city chapter at the Peoples Secretariat. He said PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari would address the public meeting via video conferencing. He said that preparations are in full swing for the public meeting. In this connection, reception camps will be set up and banners will be displayed all over the city, he added. He also said that functions would be held all over the country to mark the party’s foundation day. He thanked the city’s people for overwhelmingly voting for the PPP’s candidates in the recently held LG by-elections. He congratulated the party’s office-bearers and workers at city, district and town levels, and those associated with the subsidiary bodies of the party on securing overwhelming victory in the by-polls. PPP Sindh General Secretary Waqar Mehdi said the provincial government has been working to resolve civic issues in Karachi on a priority basis in accordance with the PPP chief’s vision. Mehdi said that owing to the continuous public service by the provincial government, the PPP has emerged as the sole political representative party of the people of the province and that of the city. The meeting prayed for the souls of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Benazir Bhutto, Shahnawaz Bhutto and other martyrs of the party. PPP Karachi General Secretary Jawed Nagori, PPP Women Wing Karachi President Dr Shahida Rahmani, Raja Razzaq, Mirza Maqbool, Muhammad Asif Khan, Shakeel Chaudhry, and presidents and general secretaries of all the PPP’s district chapters in Karachi were also present.
Dashon Bates, a 2011 Lima Senior graduate, returned to his alma mater Tuesday to talk with DECA students about entrepreneurship, career success and his new mobile application for young adults. LIMA — A new mobile application using artificial intelligence to track personal and professional growth traces its roots to Lima. Dashon Bates, a 2011 Lima Senior graduate turned technology entrepreneur, created the Izzy AI app to assist youth with the transition to adulthood. The app tracks user productivity and generates advice for how young adults can accomplish their personal and professional goals. Bates designed Izzy AI for adults ages 18 to 24, particularly those who need guidance or structure. The app urges users to “create your own dialogue about where you want to go,” said Bates, who visited his alma mater Tuesday to talk about entrepreneurship. Bates is a senior sales executive for a technology startup company in Columbus, a career he did not anticipate when he was a freshman at the University of St. Francis in Fort Wayne. Bates eventually transferred to The Ohio State University, which granted him access to recruiters from major software companies such as Oracle. He’s since worked in sales for Dell Technologies, Amazon Web Services and the startup Verkada, which manages cloud-based security systems. Bates’s success in the business world inspired him to develop the Izzy AI app — and come home to Lima Senior, where he met with students from Chrissy Hood’s business class. “There’s nothing stopping you from being what I am today,” Bates said. Bates encouraged the class to identify a problem they’re passionate about solving — in his case, mentoring young adults through major life changes with Izzy AI. Bates then revealed his intent to pay to incorporate limited liability companies for the top two students. “The most important money I spent was the $250 to incorporate my LLC,” Bates said, “because once I did that, and they sent me the letter that it was a registered company in Ohio, it became real. I had to do something with it.” The same idea lies behind Bates’s creation of Izzy AI: Young adults need structure and encouragement to achieve their goals, lest they become aimless. “Every idea is a great idea,” Bates said, “but without structure, without execution, it doesn’t get done.”PITTSBURGH — The yard lines weren’t the only things lost in the early winter squall that swept off Lake Erie and turned Huntington Bank Stadium into a snow globe Thursday night. The “good vibes only” mindset that carried the Pittsburgh Steelers through two-plus months of solid if not always spectacular football disappeared in a 24-19 loss to last-place Cleveland . Over three eventful hours, all the ingredients of a classic “trap game” the Steelers (8-3) were hoping to avoid created a recipe with an all-too-familiar aftertaste of regret and missed opportunities,. A bit of immaturity from wide receiver George Pickens, who got into an MMA-style exchange with an opposing defensive back ... again. A pinch of frustration from normally stoic defensive tackle Cam Heyward, who vented afterward about being held on a decisive snap. An ounce — OK, several ounces — of confusion from a coaching staff that couldn’t seem to decide whether to accept a late Browns penalty and then compounded it by taking a valuable timeout immediately afterward when the defense couldn’t get lined up right. A dash of curious game planning, one that included inserting backup quarterback Justin Fields in high-leverage situations, most notably on third-and-6 with less than 5 minutes to go with the game still in the balance. The gambit that worked beautifully in an emotional victory over Baltimore last Sunday was a decidedly more mixed bag this time around. Add it all up and the result was Pittsburgh’s fifth loss in its last seven trips to Cleveland, squandering a chance to move closer to its first AFC North title in four years. “We have a lot of football left,” quarterback Russell Wilson said. “We have a lot of opportunities to respond in the highest way, (the) highest level. I think everything that we want is still in front of us.” Yet a team that’s been one of the league’s bigger surprises failed to avoid a misstep and provided a reminder that for all the good things it has done of late, the Steelers remain a work in progress. “It is very deflating,” outside linebacker T.J. Watt said. “We need to close out games and we were not able to do that tonight. It sucks that we could not hold on, but a loss is a loss.” WHAT’S WORKING Wilson’s moonball. Even amid the snowflakes and quick deteriorating conditions, Wilson was unafraid to let the ball fly. Wilson averaged a healthy 12.9 yards per completion, including deep shots to Pickens, Van Jefferson and Calvin Austin III, the last a 23-yard flip to the end zone that Austin cradled to give the Steelers a late lead. If there’s one thing that Wilson has shown during his first five starts, it’s the situation — be it the score, the down, the time left on the clock or the weather — is immaterial. He will throw it where he wants when he wants, regardless of the circumstance. WHAT NEEDS HELP The final numbers for the offense — namely 368 yards and 35 minutes of possession — were good. The eye test, however, was another matter. The line had trouble protecting Wilson, giving up four sacks, and generating push when it mattered. Take out a 30-yard sprint by Fields and Pittsburgh averaged less than 3 yards per carry on the ground. The Steelers had the ball with under 5 minutes to go knowing two or three first downs would win in it. So middling runs and one ill-advised pass down the sideline by Fields later, Pittsburgh punted and momentum swung one last time. STOCK UP Outside linebacker Nick Herbig shows a more than passable T.J. Watt impression when healthy. Herbig’s strip-sack of Jameis Winston midway through the fourth quarter set up Austin’s go-ahead touchdown. Herbig now had 3.5 sacks and three forced fumbles despite missing four games with a hamstring injury. STOCK DOWN Pickens displays anger issues, particularly when things don’t go his way. The third-year wideout had his third very public, strikingly violent outburst in two months when he got into it with Browns cornerback Greg Newsome III after a last-gasp Hail Mary fell incomplete. The NFL fined Pickens more than $10,000 after he grabbed Dallas defensive back Jourdan Lewis by the facemask at the end of a loss in October. Two weeks ago Pickens and Washington’s Mike Sainristil exchanged punches following an interception. The volatile Pickens is by far Pittsburgh’s best playmaker. Yet with the stakes likely raised in the coming weeks, he needs to keep his emotions in check if he wants to make sure he stays on the field. INJURIES Pittsburgh could have starting outside linebacker Alex Highsmith (ankle) back when they visit Cincinnati Dec. 1. Highsmith has missed the last two games and five overall this season. KEY NUMBER 0-8 — head coach Mike Tomlin’s career record on the road in Thursday night games against AFC North opponents. NEXT STEPS Rest up and prepare for a finishing stretch that starts with a visit to the underperforming but still dangerous Bengals. Pittsburgh swept the season series from Cincinnati last year.
Shop Black Friday discounts at this limited-time Rosewood Home & Condo warehouse sale
Allegion PLC stock rises Monday, outperforms marketMac Engel: Jake Paul’s PR statement denying fight with Mike Tyson was rigged misses the issue