Parallax Views w/ J.G. Michael J.G.

On this edition of Parallax Views, Sean Tomilson, a PhD candidate in Middle Eastern and North African Studies at the University of Arizona, a graduate of West Point, and a U.S. Army veteran, joins the show to discuss his March 2024 Responsible Statecraft piece entitled "What the French evisceration of Algeria has to do with Gaza today". We'll discuss the "Philippeville massacre" of 1955 and the reaction to it during the Algerian War of Independence and its parallels with the October 7th Hamas attack and Israel's response to it. Sean argues that the military logic of "total victory" may not be achievable for Israel in Gaza and that there's many lessons to be gleaned from the French experience in Algeria in this regard. We'll also look at the systemic roots of both conflicts and the errors made strategically by France in regards to Algeria. What can this tell us about the Israel-Palestine conflict and how Israel has waged its military operations in Gaza since October 7th? Also, where does the logic of total victory lead and how can the brutal civilian causalities inflicted actually inflame future conflict? All that and more on this edition of Parllax Views.

On this edition of Parallax Views, in the first segment Karen Dolan, a Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies who heads of said institute's Criminalization of Race and Poverty project, stops by to discuss Biden's policies in relation to the economy, the border/immigration, and Gaza/Israel-Palestine. In the course of this segment we'll delve into where Biden appears to be leaning into the progressive base's goals and where he is wildly out-of-step with the progressive base. During the conversation Karen and I go through her two most recent articles: "Parsing Biden’s 2024 State of the Union Address" and "Biden’s populist budget marks the overdue end of trickle-down economics". Some of the key issues we cover our green energy policy, corporate price-gouging, inflation, child tax credits, the Pentagon budget, taxation of the wealthy, and more.

In the second segment of the show, UCLA law professor Richard Abel, known for his work on apartheid South Africa (his work was even promoted by Nelson Mandela!), joins the show to discuss his trilogy of books on autocrats and autocracy. The third entry in this series Prof. Abel has penned is entitled How Autocrats Seek Power: Resisting Trump and Trumpism and deals heavily with the events of and leading up to the January 6th insurrection. We'll discuss a number of issues, have a respectful back-and-forth about the U.S.'s own relations with autocratic states that the U.S. consider allies, get Richard's thoughts on people who are conscientiously abstaining from voting for Joe Biden over Gaza, chat about Trump and conspiracy theories, and much, much more. Prof. Abel will also talk about his work criticizing the Bush and Obama administration during the War on Terror and why he considers Trump more dangerous than previous presidential administrations.

On this edition of Parallax Views, we delve into the controversial world of deathmatch wrestling with deathmatch wrestler Mike Krueger. For those unfamiliar with deathmatch wrestling, it is by far the most extreme variant of professional wrestling imaginable. When watching a deathmatch promotion like Game Changer Wrestling (GCW), Combat Zone Wrestling (CZW), Xtreme Pro Wrestling (XPW), Underground Empire Wrestling (UEW), or any number of others similar promotions you can expect to see things that you'd never see in a mainstream pro wrestling promotion like WWE. This includes wrestler diving off balconies into glass, wrestler being thrown into flaming tables, and competitors using objects like light tubes and barbed wire bats as weapons. It is, in other words, the "outlaw" form of pro wrestling that is often heavily criticized for it's blood-n-guts gruesomeness.
And yet, deathmatch wrestling has cultivated a rather diverse audience. On one hand there's the "anti-woke" fans of Rob Black's notorious XPW. On the other there's Game Changer Wrestling, which has become popular especially with some in the LGBTQ+ community for its inclusiveness.
Additionally, despite its violence, deathmatch wrestling also has some famous fans. The Muslim gonzo punk novelist Michael Muhammad Knight, for example, is on record as being a fan of legendary deathmatch wrestler Necro Butcher. And then there's the RackaRacka Brothers aka Danny Philippou and Michael Philippou, known for directing last year's A24-distributed sleeper horror hit Talk to Me, who are not only making a documentary on deathmatch wrestling, but have actually participated in deathmatches.
And they aren't the only celebrities who have been involved in deathmatch wrestling. Actor David Arquette, known for the Scream movies (as well as his infamous stint in mainstream wrestling as the short-lived World Heavyweight champion of WCW), did a deathmatch with one of the genre's biggest names: Nick Gage. Additionally, rock stars like Glenn Danzig, Korn's Jonathan Davis, Slayer's Kerry King, and former Danzig bassist Josh Lazie as well as rap duo the Insane Clown Posse made appearances or were involved with XPW in the late 90s/early 2000s.
The deathmatch performance art shows of New York's Casanova Valentine have gained the attention of punk rock and urban hipster youths at bars. And VICE has tackled the topic in multiple documentaries, most notably in in season 3 of the popular TV show Dark Side of the Ring's "The Ultra-Violence of Nick Gage" episode.
Violent as it may be, deathmatch wrestling is, against seemingly all odds, arguably breaking through to the mainstream. The widely listened to Joe Rogan Experience podcast devoting an entire segment to the subject with the aforementioned Phillippou Bros. should attest to that fact.
What is the appeal of deathmatch wrestling though? Is there more to it than the elements of ultra-violence? And what is it like being a deathmatch wrestler?
Mike Krueger will help answers those questions and more. We'll discuss a number of topics including:
- The punk rock nature of deathmatch wrestling
-  The connection between deathmatch wrestlers and the smaller, more intimate audiences they perform for
- The Mount Rushmore of death match wrestling
- The trendiness of deathmatch wrestling in the past few years
- What drives deathmatch wrestlers?
- The dangerous nature of deathmatch wrestling and the fact that the damage the wrestlers' bodies take in deathmatches can't be fact even if the results are predetermined
- Trauma, psychological issues, and deathmatch wrestlers
- The psychology of deathmatch wrestling
- Old school deathmatch wrestling from Japan: Frontier Martial Arts Wrestling (FMW) and their infamous barbed wire exploding death match between Terry Funk and Atsushi Onita
- Storytelling in deathmatch wrestling
- The wear and tear Mike's body has endured from deathmatch wrestling
- The cut-throat nature of the independent wrestling scene; backstab

On this edition of Parallax Views, Jon Hoffman, policy analyst in defense and foreign policy at the Cato Institute, joins the show to discuss his Foreign Policy article "For America, Israel Is a Liability, Not an Asset". Hot off his appearance on MSNBC discussing said article, Hoffman joined me to go further into the main points that he raises throughout the piece. Specfically, Hoffman argues that is time for the U.S. to reconsider its special relationship with Israel. He argues that it has become detrimental to both the U.S. and Israel. This is not, to say, however that Hoffman thinks we should have no relationship with Israel. Instead he argues, as other such as Matthe Yglesias have also done, that it is time for a normalization of the U.S.-Israel relationship. The current nature of the special relationship, he argues, does not serve American interests and does harm to U.S. foreign policy and stability in the Middle East. We delve into such issues as the Gaza War, Israel's lack of an endgame strategy beyond "eliminating Hamas" in regards to Gaza, fury against the U.S. and Israel by the Arab streets in the region, how unconditional support for countries like Israel and Saudi Arabia can undermine belief in the U.S.-led "international rules-based order", the nature of the U.S.-Saudi relationship and oil, the argument that Israel is the U.S.'s necessary "eyes and ears" in the Middle East, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and pro-Israel lobbying efforts, how the special relationship may be empowering right-wing figures like Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu TO THE DETERIMENT of Israel itself (this is likely a key point for people who would dismiss Hoffman's piece as an anti-Israel screed; it isn't regardless of what one's views of Israel and the Gaza War are), what normalization of relations between the U.S. and Israel would look like, and much, much more.

On this edition of Parallax Views, Kristin Lunz Trujillo, Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of South Carolina, joins the show to discuss her Newsweek op-ed "'White Rural Rage' Cites My Research. It Gets Everything About Rural America Wrong". Like previous guest Prof. Nicholas F. Jacobs, Trujillo has a critique of Paul Waldman and Tom Schaller's new book White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy. Given that the book has been covered in various media outlets as of late, Trujillo's critique seems relevant, especially as many Democrats and Democratic Party strategists may take the book to heart despite the problems with the way it cites research. Trujillo and I get into the problems with both the blanket demonization of rural America as well as the romanticization of it. We'll also delve into the problems with the books depiction of rural American politics, a subject that Trujillo specializes in researching. We'll look at the rural America in relation to Christian nationalism and QAnon conspriacy theories as well as delving into how media creates a certain image of rural America that flattens our understanding of rural Americans and their voting habits. All that and more on this edition of the show!
In the second, short-but-sweet bonus segment of the show The Libertarian Institute's Patrick MacFarlane joins the program to discuss the right-wing culture warriors pushing stories about Haitian cannibal gangs in light of the crisis in Haiti and how these stories may not be true and actually serve as war propaganda. In particular we hone in on the claims around Jimmy "Barbecue" Chérizier as detailed in his article "Culture Warriors Spread Disinfo on 'Haitian Cannibals'".

On this edition of Parallax Views, last week a number of prominent Jewish Americans came together to sign an open letter voicing opposition to AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and its influence on both major American political parties.
A statement in the leader reads, "Given that Israel is so isolated internationally that it could not continue its inhumane treatment of the Palestinians without U.S. political and military support, AIPAC is an essential link in the chain that holds in place the unbearable tragedy of Israel/Palestine. In coming U.S. elections, we need to break that chain in order to help free the people of Israel/Palestine to pursue peaceful coexistence."
This open letter comes at a crucial time given Israel's war in Gaza and mounting concerns over the humanitarian crisis faced by Palestinians at this very moment. Prominent signees include actors Elliot Gould and Wallace Shawn, journalist Martin A. Lee, playwright Tony Kushner, and previous Parallax Views guests such as Ariel Gold, Dave Zirin, Mitchell Plitnick, and Samuel Moyn. Given AIPAC activities against progessive candidates in the Democratic Party, this letter should catch the eye of progressive voters and activists.
Alan Minsky, executive director of Progressive Democrats of America and one of the main forces behind the letter, joins the show to discuss the letter, AIPAC, and related issues.
Full text of the open letter below:
A Statement from Jewish Americans Opposing AIPAC’s Intervention in Democratic Party PoliticsWe are Jewish Americans who have varying perspectives. We’ve agreed to come together to highlight and oppose the unprecedented and damaging role of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and allied groups in U.S. elections, especially within Democratic Party primaries. We recognize the purpose of AIPAC's interventions in electoral politics is to defeat any critics of Israeli Government policy and to support candidates who vow unwavering loyalty to Israel, thereby ensuring the United States' continuing support for all that Israel does, regardless of its violence and illegality.Given that Israel is so isolated internationally that it could not continue its inhumane treatment of the Palestinians without U.S. political and military support, AIPAC is an essential link in the chain that holds in place the unbearable tragedy of Israel/Palestine. In the coming U.S. elections, we need to break that chain in order to help free the people of Israel/Palestine to pursue peaceful coexistence.In the same 2021-22 election cycle in which AIPAC endorsed Republican extremists and dozens of Congress members who’d voted against certifying Biden’s victory over Trump, the AIPAC network raised millions from Trump donors and spent the money inside Democratic primaries against progressives, mostly candidates of color. AIPAC is now vowing to spend even more millions in the 2024 Democratic primaries, targeting specific Democrats in Congress – initially all legislators of color – who’ve advocated for a Gaza ceasefire, a position supported by the vast majority of Democratic voters. AIPAC’s election spending increasingly works to defeat candidates who criticize the racist policies of Israel.In contrast to AIPAC, we are American Jews who believe that U.S. support for foreign governments should only be extended to those that respect the full human and civil rights, and right to self-determination, of all people. We oppose all forms of racism and bigotry, including antisemitism – and we support the historic alliance in our country of Jewish Americans with African Americans and other people of color in the cause of civil rights and equal justice.Therefore, we strongly oppose AIPAC's attempts to dominate Democratic primary elections. We call on Democratic candidates to not accept AIPAC network funding, and demand that the Democratic leadership not allow Republican funders to use that network to deform Democratic primary elections.