Speaker 1: Hudson River Radio dot Com.
Speaker 2: It beats listening to nothing.
Speaker 3: My goodness, be Frank. We're the only way to be
Speaker 3: is Frank. Hello everyone, and welcome to being Frank. We're
Speaker 3: the only way to be, is Frank. I'm your host,
Speaker 3: Frank Leborno, and I'd like to thank you for joining
Speaker 3: us on what we like to call the Intelligent Conversation podcast,
Speaker 3: where no conversation is out of bounds and all points
Speaker 3: of view are welcome. We go live to tape and
Speaker 3: I always give you the date so you have some
Speaker 3: relevance and context to our conversation. It is the sixteenth
Speaker 3: of October, with three weeks, by the way left to
Speaker 3: the biggest election, certainly in my lifetime, which is a
Speaker 3: fifty year plus cycle, so it's very important. It brings
Speaker 3: us to our topic today. Fascism, a term that for
Speaker 3: many Americans conjures images the Greatest generation storing the beaches
Speaker 3: at Normandy, we're tearing down a Nazi flag in Berlin
Speaker 3: during World War Two. It was seen as a great
Speaker 3: evil then that had to be destroyed, and America rose
Speaker 3: to the task of doing just that. But despite those images,
Speaker 3: fascism was not destroyed In nineteen forty five. It has
Speaker 3: had waves of reappearances in the many years since, not
Speaker 3: only in Europe, but here in the US as well,
Speaker 3: And in fact, many believe that despite its horrific reputation
Speaker 3: to most, it has experienced a global resurgence. Yes here
Speaker 3: in America too. It is certainly a word that in
Speaker 3: this torret election cycle has been used with alarming frequency.
Speaker 3: But do we really know the true meaning of the word,
Speaker 3: its origins, its core principles, and perhaps most importantly, the
Speaker 3: implications for us should have replaced democracy and become the
Speaker 3: ruling principle that guides our government. Once again, we have
Speaker 3: a great guest to enlighten us with some intelligent conversation
Speaker 3: on this most important topic. He is a musician, author, critic,
Speaker 3: full professor of Media Studies at Fordham Universe, New York,
Speaker 3: My colleague and a frequent contributor to Being Frank. That's
Speaker 3: why I call him the renaissance Man. Always takes me
Speaker 3: at least two or three minutes to introduce him. But again,
Speaker 3: it's my pleasure to welcome doctor Paul Levinson. Paul, thank
Speaker 3: you for joining us.
Speaker 1: Well great to be here with you. I could listen
Speaker 1: to your introductions of me all.
Speaker 3: Day, Well, they usually take all day because steeps like
Speaker 3: I wind up stumbling over them quite a bit. But
Speaker 3: as we well know, that's kind of what being frank
Speaker 3: is really.
Speaker 1: All about, right, so absolutely.
Speaker 3: Anyway, let's let's get to the task at hand, which
Speaker 3: is to talk a little bit about fascistm It's a word.
Speaker 3: We hear it all the time. Most of us are
Speaker 3: familiar with the black and black and white footage, et
Speaker 3: cetera associated with it, But what does it really mean?
Speaker 3: First of all, what's the root of the world? Where
Speaker 3: exactly does it come from? I know it's a Latin thing,
Speaker 3: so it has a certain direct meaning. Let's talk about
Speaker 3: that first.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, the Italian word fascismo, which is fascism just
Speaker 1: take away the o, means bundle of sticks, and what
Speaker 1: that in turn means is power through unity, because the
Speaker 1: bundle of sticks is stronger than any of the single
Speaker 1: sticks on their own. And obviously the Italian comes from
Speaker 1: the Latin. The Latin comes from the ancient Romans, and
Speaker 1: for them, the various words that had fascists in it
Speaker 1: also meant bundle of roots around an axe.
Speaker 3: So you see that symbol often in ancient Roman depictions
Speaker 3: behind a throne or something, there's this tide bundle of
Speaker 3: sticks reads in an axe head. I mean, I've seen it,
Speaker 3: so I'm acknowledging, please explain for please.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, and that's exactly the same thing. It's even
Speaker 1: more vivid, more direct than just a bundle of sticks,
Speaker 1: because you have the bundle of roots. Once again, many
Speaker 1: roots unity bonded together. But whether they bonded together with
Speaker 1: an axe, something that you can cut something with, chop
Speaker 1: down a tree, or even worse, kill an enemy. And
Speaker 1: there you get into one of the definitive aspects of fascism,
Speaker 1: which it's much much more than an opinion. It's an
Speaker 1: opinion that says, if you disagree with me and I
Speaker 1: can't convince you through logic, and we can talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about what the logic of fascism is, I
Speaker 1: am going to impose my view on you. And if
Speaker 1: you still don't like that, I'm liable to arrest you.
Speaker 1: And you know, you don't have to talk about Mussolini
Speaker 1: and Hitler. You can talk about Putin right now in Russia.
Speaker 1: It's the classic fascist state. And what does Putin do
Speaker 1: with people who disagree with them? Well, you have to
Speaker 1: happen to be near a balcony. Maybe somebody comes up
Speaker 1: from behind them and throws them off the balcony. Or
Speaker 1: if you're arrested and thrown in gel, you're liable never
Speaker 1: to get out of that gel. You can get mysteriously
Speaker 1: ill just as you're about to be released and die.
Speaker 1: So this combination of power through unity, which in itself
Speaker 1: is you know, not an objectionable.
Speaker 3: I wanted to make that point. You know there's a
Speaker 3: perversion there. There's unity is strength from one many. We
Speaker 3: use it ourselves. Our connection to Roman mythology and government
Speaker 3: is astounding. You know, the idea that if you take
Speaker 3: a single read or root it, you can break it
Speaker 3: over your knee, bundle them together and you can't do it.
Speaker 3: But then you throw the axe head in and you
Speaker 3: get kind of this perversion of something that it's mostly good.
Speaker 3: But maybe we have to look a little further.
Speaker 1: Well, the key difference between fascism and democracy is that
Speaker 1: democracy recognizes that there is a diversity of opinions. So
Speaker 1: what do you do. You argue those opinions out verbally,
Speaker 1: you pass laws that embody those opinions. Maybe a Supreme
Speaker 1: court will say no, that's not a justifiable law, so
Speaker 1: we're going to find this unconstitutional. All of those are
Speaker 1: expressions of differences of opinion, but they are worked out
Speaker 1: in a non violent way. The thing about fascism is
Speaker 1: the fascists can't tolerate any difference of opinion. And again,
Speaker 1: there is a logic in fascism. They try to explain
Speaker 1: why their point of view is good. But in the end,
Speaker 1: if you don't accept that argument, the argument is not
Speaker 1: settled through any court. It's not settled through any logical
Speaker 1: group that's going to look at it and evaluate. It's
Speaker 1: settled by violence. And by the way, the other important
Speaker 1: point is all too often what fascists do is they
Speaker 1: have a disregard for objective truths. They just make things up.
Speaker 1: And here we get into if you look at what
Speaker 1: the Institute for Propaganda Analysis.
Speaker 3: To talk about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, they in all kinds of ways simple
Speaker 1: solutions to complex problems. There's an economic problem in Germany.
Speaker 1: Whose fault is it, Well, it's these Jews and other
Speaker 1: non Christian people who have invaded our country, invaded our
Speaker 1: body politic, are poisoning the pure blood of Germans.
Speaker 3: And I see where we're going with this and I
Speaker 3: want to get there because I think it's important that
Speaker 3: we get there. It's part of our conversation. But bring
Speaker 3: because you also you mentioned so, I think it's timely
Speaker 3: now to jump in and say you mentioned two countries
Speaker 3: in particular that we associate most with fascism, certainly in
Speaker 3: our lifetime, even though it was before us, it's within
Speaker 3: our known history. Sometimes for younger people we both teach
Speaker 3: it Fordham and it's amazing, like you've heard of World
Speaker 3: War two? Right, and they say, yeah, we've heard of it. Anyway,
Speaker 3: With that being said, what was And I think, because
Speaker 3: we can draw the parallels, what was ripe within those
Speaker 3: countries at that time where fascism found such a purchase,
Speaker 3: where it became part of the national psyche. Can you
Speaker 3: explain what was going on them then and particularly in
Speaker 3: those places that allowed it to flourish, and on their
Speaker 3: parallels that you were obviously starting to make today. Please
Speaker 3: continue with that.
Speaker 1: Sure, well, Italy had a bushel of grievances as the
Speaker 1: twentieth century developed. In the first place, it was a
Speaker 1: very recently formed country. You know, Rome is ancient, but
Speaker 1: Italy is a country is relatively recent, much younger than France,
Speaker 1: and much younger than England and Germany as well, was
Speaker 1: relatively recent. It was Prussia, you know, in the late
Speaker 1: eighteen hundreds, going into the nineteen hundreds, etc. You know,
Speaker 1: Bismarck was the Prime Minister of Prussia in the eighteen
Speaker 1: seventies and eighties. So we take for granted the age
Speaker 1: of country trees, because you know, we go back to
Speaker 1: the you know, late seventeen seventies. England goes back much
Speaker 1: much further, France goes back much much further. But some
Speaker 1: of these European countries, in particular Italy and Germany, were
Speaker 1: much more recent and so in effect, and maybe you know,
Speaker 1: this is too nice a word for them, they were
Speaker 1: children which hadn't found their way yet. And Italy also
Speaker 1: had the grievance of it. They obviously knew that they
Speaker 1: came from ancient Rome, and so it was always a
Speaker 1: grievance of anyone really living in Italy ever since Rome fell.
Speaker 1: You know, why can't we get back up there. We
Speaker 1: once ruled the world. We once had this empire that
Speaker 1: encompassed you know, northern Africa, a lot of Europe, et cetera,
Speaker 1: et cetera. You know, surely we did that in the past.
Speaker 1: Why can't we do that now great again?
Speaker 3: It might if I might there you go, Okay.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right, make Italy great again. And Germany had
Speaker 1: its own huge chip on its shoulder. Germany was beaten
Speaker 1: in World War One. You know, they put up a
Speaker 1: pretty good battle. I once spoke, you know, to a
Speaker 1: German guy who actually was an American citizen, but he
Speaker 1: once explained to me that people living in Germany, you know,
Speaker 1: in the twenties and thirties, thought that Germany was this
Speaker 1: incredibly powerful country with intelligent people. But they lost World
Speaker 1: War One because they had poor allies. They got stuck
Speaker 1: with countries that weren't the strongest. And even in World
Speaker 1: War Two, I mean, Japan put up a good battle,
Speaker 1: but Italy wasn't exactly a major power. So what led
Speaker 1: though to Nazis getting such a stronghold in Germany is, first,
Speaker 1: the Germans did not have that much experience in democracy.
Speaker 1: Up until the nineteenth the end of World War One,
Speaker 1: Germany was a monarchy. It was a somewhat constitutional monarchy,
Speaker 1: not as constitutional monarchy as England was. And when Germany
Speaker 1: was beaten in World War One, the Germans tried to
Speaker 1: create a democracy, the Weimar Republic, and you know, they
Speaker 1: had a you know, an effective bill of rights, but
Speaker 1: the German people had no experience in that. And so
Speaker 1: when you think about the worldwide depression that was beginning
Speaker 1: to erupt at the end of the nineteen twenties in
Speaker 1: the early nineteen thirties, that just added to the aggravation
Speaker 1: of a lot of Germans feeling that they weren't getting
Speaker 1: a fair shake.
Speaker 3: Felt like they really got and they probably did get
Speaker 3: really screwed with many of the so called peace treaties
Speaker 3: after World War One. Obviously to the winner belong to spoils,
Speaker 3: and they took them. So Germany was stinging from that
Speaker 3: as well too. We talk about a national identity because
Speaker 3: I know Hitler used that, and I know you're going
Speaker 3: to bring to and the propagandas like, I know what
Speaker 3: it's like to be degraded. I was a soldier. I
Speaker 3: fought for this country, so please continue.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but here again, there's a fundamental illogic that runs
Speaker 1: through all of fascism, and Adolf Hitler is a tragically
Speaker 1: excellent example of that. Because the Nazi ideology was preaching
Speaker 1: the beauty of arians, blue eyed, blonde haired people. Adolf
Speaker 1: Hitler didn't look anything like that, right, Hitler.
Speaker 3: Short, dark air dark, exactly right.
Speaker 1: So you know, right there you can see that there
Speaker 1: was an underlying illogic, lack of logic. And this goes
Speaker 1: right into the brilliant propaganda that Joseph Goebbels Adolf Hitler's
Speaker 1: Minister of Propaganda and Popular Enlightenment. I'm not being sarcastic.
Speaker 1: That was his title. So at least they were honest
Speaker 1: about what the man did you know? He was a
Speaker 1: minister of propaganda, a very intelligent guy. By the way,
Speaker 1: a PhD just goes to show you because you have
Speaker 1: a PhD doesn't mean you're going to be a good person.
Speaker 1: And this is, by the way, a mistake to just
Speaker 1: briefly jump back here to the United States. One of
Speaker 1: the great dangers in this country, I think, is when
Speaker 1: Trump says crazy, stupid, dumb things that are obviously ridiculous,
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that the people who are advising him
Speaker 1: believe that. And it's always a very bad mistake to
Speaker 1: underestimate your opponents. And so what Hitler was able to
Speaker 1: do with Joseph Goebels really running the propaganda show was
Speaker 1: basically create a web of lies. So again simple solution
Speaker 1: to a complex problem. The German economy is suffering, not
Speaker 1: because there's a worldwide depression, not because maybe Germany could
Speaker 1: have done better things to improve the economy, but because
Speaker 1: there were non German people in Germany who were literally,
Speaker 1: in the view of the Nazis, infecting Germany and therefore
Speaker 1: preventing Germany from reaching its true height. And this simple
Speaker 1: solution for a complex problem is a great thing for
Speaker 1: a propagandist and a fascist propagandist to use. But there
Speaker 1: are other aspects of that as well, and we can
Speaker 1: talk about them as well. One of the best examples
Speaker 1: is appeal to authority. Why should you do something because
Speaker 1: I'm an authority and I know what's best. Your logic
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if you have evidence and
Speaker 1: arguments that contradict what I'm saying. I'm at the top here,
Speaker 1: I know what's best for you, and you know it
Speaker 1: just goes on and on.
Speaker 3: Paul, if I might jump in, that's a select few
Speaker 3: at the top, and you think of it as a pyramid,
Speaker 3: and you look at it in the particular case of Germany,
Speaker 3: But it's typical of many. There's usually a strong man,
Speaker 3: you could say, a strong person, but let's face it,
Speaker 3: throughout history it's mostly been strong men at the top,
Speaker 3: with others willing to support him as long as they
Speaker 3: get their share at the pie of the pie. But
Speaker 3: the people at the bottom get so little of the pie.
Speaker 3: How do they at the top manage to to convince
Speaker 3: those at the bottom of the pyramid to live on
Speaker 3: the crumbs? The so called trickle down? One of the
Speaker 3: key things is and you've mentioned they I'd like to
Speaker 3: give you to get into detail, and the use of
Speaker 3: propaganda to convince people that they're doing things in the
Speaker 3: people's bench's best interest when that's the furthest thing from
Speaker 3: the truth, and everybody else can see it except for
Speaker 3: those who buy the line.
Speaker 1: That's a great question, and again it applies to the
Speaker 1: United States. I've often asked myself, why would anyone other
Speaker 1: than a millionaire ever vote for a Republican in any situation?
Speaker 1: And yet the Republicans, whether we like it or not,
Speaker 1: I mean, they certainly get forty six, forty seven, forty
Speaker 1: eight percent of the vote in many, many states and
Speaker 1: in many many elections, and they get those votes from
Speaker 1: people who make you and me seem like millionaire, And
Speaker 1: what are the Republicans doing that makes them these poor
Speaker 1: people ever even think of voting for a Republican. So
Speaker 1: there was a psychologist, a student of Sigmund Freud, by
Speaker 1: the name of Eric from f R m M. He
Speaker 1: wrote a great book in nineteen forty five called Escape
Speaker 1: from Freedom. And the question that he asked in the
Speaker 1: book is why indeed did the German populace support this
Speaker 1: Nazi ideology, this idea that you must respect and follow
Speaker 1: what the leader defeure is telling you, this appeal to authority,
Speaker 1: And what from I think very stuteley realized is that
Speaker 1: the appeal to authority in politics basically is drawing on
Speaker 1: the experience that every human being had as a child,
Speaker 1: where you followed what your parents said. And when you
Speaker 1: are dealing when you are a parent, and let's say
Speaker 1: you're dealing with a two three year old child, you
Speaker 1: indeed very often use appeal to authority, and you even
Speaker 1: sometimes use force to get the two or three year
Speaker 1: old to do something that's not dangerous. For example, I
Speaker 1: often use the example if you're crossing the street with
Speaker 1: let's say a three year old in New York City.
Speaker 1: You and you say we have to wait until the
Speaker 1: light change is green, and you have to hold my hand,
Speaker 1: and the little kid says, I don't want to hold
Speaker 1: your hand. I want to cross the street when it's red.
Speaker 1: You might say, listen, that's very dangerous. You know cars
Speaker 1: are coming. But you're not going to have too lengthy
Speaker 1: a discussion with this, you know, sweet little kid obviously
Speaker 1: a smart kid who has an opinion. He or she
Speaker 1: wants to cross the street even though it's a red light,
Speaker 1: even though it's very dangerous. So very quickly you're going
Speaker 1: to say, you know what, you're not going to cross
Speaker 1: the street now, you're going to hold my hand because
Speaker 1: I'm your father have to do.
Speaker 3: We've all heard that right the way up, because I said, so,
Speaker 3: that's right. So it's an extrapolation of that.
Speaker 1: Really, it is an extrapolation. And that's why you know,
Speaker 1: from was a good psychologist, and you know, Freud himself,
Speaker 1: you know, realized that what people do in adulthood is
Speaker 1: based on the experiences they went through in childhood. And
Speaker 1: everyone went through this experience, you know, anyone who had
Speaker 1: who had parents who are taking care of them now obviously.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is a fascinating thing in and of itself,
Speaker 1: even independent of fascism. As children grow up and they
Speaker 1: become teenagers, unfortunately, parents often continue exercising that appeal to authority,
Speaker 1: but it no longer works. Are a twelve thirteen fourteen
Speaker 1: year old, because when a toddler, you know, is twelve
Speaker 1: thirteen fourteen, you know they're not little kids anymore. You
Speaker 1: know they have a full capacity for adult reasoning, and
Speaker 1: they might well disagree with their parents and want to
Speaker 1: do what they want to do. And in fact, as
Speaker 1: we become adults, no one wants to be told what
Speaker 1: to do by an authority. We want to make decisions
Speaker 1: for ourselves. So in a democracy there are limits to
Speaker 1: what authorities can do. So here in the United States
Speaker 1: doesn't work perfectly all the time. If an authority does
Speaker 1: something wrong to us, let's say a cop. I'll give
Speaker 1: you a true story. I'm driving through Westchester years ago
Speaker 1: with my daughter. I was picking up from a friend's house,
Speaker 1: and I don't know what I did wrong. Like a
Speaker 1: cop basically pulls us over. But I make the mistake
Speaker 1: of saying to the officer, can I help you? Because
Speaker 1: I was in a bear mood I didn't want to
Speaker 1: be pulled over, and said, oh yeah, i'll help you.
Speaker 1: You know what, I'm going to write you a ticket
Speaker 1: for going through that stop sign. So I said, what
Speaker 1: stop sign? There's no stop sign there. He said, well
Speaker 1: I think there is, and he writes a ticket that
Speaker 1: went through a stop sign, pulls away. I go to
Speaker 1: court a month later and the cop doesn't even show up.
Speaker 1: The judge throws the case out. But I'm aggravating because
Speaker 1: I missed my favorite television show, Eliots that was on
Speaker 1: at that time because that cop gave me a ticket.
Speaker 1: But that's an example of in a democracy, you don't
Speaker 1: have to accept what an authority is saying you have
Speaker 1: to do. You can protest you you know, if it's
Speaker 1: a civil matter, you can go to court. You can sue.
Speaker 1: If you are doing business with some kind of rich
Speaker 1: company and they're not providing what they say they're going
Speaker 1: to provide, but they're taking you money, you don't have
Speaker 1: to take it from that authority. You can go to
Speaker 1: court and sue them. So that is a key difference
Speaker 1: right there. In a fascist state, there might be a
Speaker 1: court system, but it's all rigged to support whatever the
Speaker 1: authority says.
Speaker 3: Well, you know that brings me to and you'll forgive
Speaker 3: the analogy, but you know the fashion it's almost like
Speaker 3: a virus. You know, a virus attacks as a host,
Speaker 3: but generally usually it kills the host and kills itself. So,
Speaker 3: if you'll follow me, my thinking is, you know, often
Speaker 3: fascism hides under the guide of patriotism. Okay, so here
Speaker 3: in this country we have patriots who are all about freedom.
Speaker 3: We are so willing to give away their freedom to
Speaker 3: a fascist type control to just do something because it
Speaker 3: tells somebody tells them. I don't understand the disconnect where
Speaker 3: they're not acting in their own self best interest. You know,
Speaker 3: I want one of my fears going forward, I said,
Speaker 3: you know, if if you followed my social poets, and
Speaker 3: I'm not shy that way, I'm very outspoken, and I
Speaker 3: literally fear that if things go a certain way, we're
Speaker 3: gonna talk about more details, kind of stepping in around it.
Speaker 3: But there is certainly the suggestion that we are leaning
Speaker 3: more towards fascism than we ever have, certainly in my lifetime,
Speaker 3: and that frightens me because I believe that even this show,
Speaker 3: this program could go away because we've been critical. If
Speaker 3: we got critical of the government, well we're shut off.
Speaker 3: I don't know how anyone, any red blooded American, if
Speaker 3: you win, would accept that. Yet people who are fascists
Speaker 3: gladly do so, and are willing to beat and control
Speaker 3: and kill others who are not talk to that. It's
Speaker 3: crazy to me.
Speaker 1: Well it is crazy. And I think again, what the
Speaker 1: Nazis did is they fed on the discontent of the
Speaker 1: German people after World War WI. And what Mussolini did
Speaker 1: in Italy was, as I said, basically exploited the discontent
Speaker 1: that the average Italian citizens felt after World War One.
Speaker 1: And here in the United States there are a lot
Speaker 1: of discontented people. And if you look at the people,
Speaker 1: you know, at Trump rallies, you know, obviously there are
Speaker 1: all kinds of people. You know. Again, if forty eight
Speaker 1: percent of the population in an election of voting for him,
Speaker 1: it's a mistake to say it's just one kind of person.
Speaker 1: But by and large, the core of Trump's supporters are
Speaker 1: Americans who feel they have not been given a fair deal.
Speaker 1: And when somebody like Trump comes along and says I
Speaker 1: have the solution to it, you know, and this is
Speaker 1: how Trump talks about everything. You've probably heard him talk.
Speaker 1: You know, when I'm elected president, even before I take office,
Speaker 1: I'm going to end the Russian Ukrainian War, and while
Speaker 1: we're at it, i'll make peace in Israel. And you know,
Speaker 1: I'll take care of all these things for you, and
Speaker 1: you won't have to worry about North Korea anymore because
Speaker 1: you probably know Kim Jong il loves me. He sent
Speaker 1: me love letters, and you know I get along in
Speaker 1: order to make deals. I'll work out everything for you.
Speaker 1: And all the frustrations that you feel, I've heard them,
Speaker 1: I understand them. And even though I claim to be
Speaker 1: a billionaire and I have nothing in common with you. Again,
Speaker 1: Adolf Hitler has nothing in common with the Aryan ordeal ideal.
Speaker 1: It's the same kind of thing. So even though Trump
Speaker 1: has nothing in common with Americans who feel frustrated, cut
Speaker 1: out of the action, not getting their just due, always
Speaker 1: worry about where the next paycheck is going to come from,
Speaker 1: you know, and that person comes along and says, I'm
Speaker 1: going to make all that better for you. This appeal
Speaker 1: to authority works, and that's where it comes from, even
Speaker 1: though it sounds insane, because the people buy and large
Speaker 1: who support Trump have the most to worry about if
Speaker 1: somebody like Trump was in power. It's the Democrats who
Speaker 1: are saying, we want to make sure all people have
Speaker 1: medical care, you know, we want to make sure that
Speaker 1: everyone has complete control over what they do with their
Speaker 1: own bodies. We don't want to impose anything on you.
Speaker 1: That's what the progressive ideal tries to be. Ironically, Trump
Speaker 1: is able to get people who would have the most
Speaker 1: imposed upon them were Trump back in office. And that's
Speaker 1: why former Chief of Staff Millie has said that he thinks,
Speaker 1: and I agree with him, that Trump is the most
Speaker 1: dangerous person ever to have been in the White House.
Speaker 1: When there were protests in the street, Black Lives Matter
Speaker 1: protests in the street because that police officer murdered George Floyd,
Speaker 1: just murdered him, killed him, you know, in broad daylight,
Speaker 1: and so people are protesting about that. Trump wanted to
Speaker 1: call out the National Guard to basically disband that those protests.
Speaker 3: Up here because it's a great point I think we
Speaker 3: can make, and you'll make here too, And that's been
Speaker 3: used in part of what we don't make a point of.
Speaker 3: And both parties sell their their fair share of fear
Speaker 3: and loathing in particular, the Democrats had caught up somewhat.
Speaker 3: I think the republic have made it an art form,
Speaker 3: certainly under Trump, of selling fear and loathing, fear migrants,
Speaker 3: loathe them, et cetera. But now they're also using a
Speaker 3: tactic of saying those Black Lives Matter protests, well, they burnt,
Speaker 3: they tore down things, and yet it was allowed to happen.
Speaker 3: So there again there's that little bit of that fascist
Speaker 3: law and order. We would never allow something like that
Speaker 3: to happen. So in a sense of the progressiveness shown
Speaker 3: by Black Lives Matters is being used against it also
Speaker 3: by the fascists, and it's making points. Certainly the people
Speaker 3: who are afraid, I don't want that happening, and you shouldn't.
Speaker 3: I don't want riots in downtown Nayak. That would destroy things.
Speaker 3: We're all about free speech, but I don't want destruction.
Speaker 3: That seems fair enough talk to that.
Speaker 1: Well. First of all, the First Amendment says people have
Speaker 1: the right to peaceably assemble for redressive grievances. So the
Speaker 1: key point is, indeed, violence is not acceptable. You know,
Speaker 1: a riot, even if it's on behalf of a worthy
Speaker 1: cause like the murder of George Floyd by a cop
Speaker 1: an agent of the state. That's a worthy cause. But
Speaker 1: the people who organize those protests never said that they
Speaker 1: should be violent. Nobody thinks there should there should be violence.
Speaker 1: You have to peaceably protest. But a very important point
Speaker 1: that you're making is Trump is now saying that the
Speaker 1: Democrats are fascists because they're saying, Hey, that's what you're
Speaker 1: trying to arrest me. You are You know, I'm being
Speaker 1: brought up on these charges.
Speaker 3: Assassination attempts because if you're a rhetoric, nobody's shooting in you.
Speaker 3: They're shooting it.
Speaker 1: That's right. By the way, about the assassination attempt, I
Speaker 1: don't mind saying this, it's the strangest assassination attempt in history.
Speaker 1: First of all, they supposedly practice shot his ear off,
Speaker 1: and yet within like a week or two later, the
Speaker 1: guys walking around looks fine. Not to mention the fact
Speaker 1: that he basically looked pretty fine, like a little shaken up.
Speaker 1: And it's no joking matter if it really was an assassin.
Speaker 3: But you know, I don't almost sounds like a plot
Speaker 3: for a movie that we're going to talk about him
Speaker 3: after the break so yes.
Speaker 1: But so look, I don't know one way or another,
Speaker 1: but I'm not comfortable calling it an assassination attempt. I
Speaker 1: know that there was a you know, one person of
Speaker 1: a Trump supporter was killed, and you know, you know,
Speaker 1: some people were wounded. So I'm not in the slightest
Speaker 1: bit minimizing that that's a horrible tragedy. There were real
Speaker 1: bullets fired. But I don't And to this day, by
Speaker 1: the way, there hasn't been a medical report released. Usually
Speaker 1: when there's an assassination attempt, that you get like doctors
Speaker 1: talking to the press immediately. Maybe I missed it. I
Speaker 1: haven't heard a word about that. But right Trump is
Speaker 1: trying to flip the script and say the fact that
Speaker 1: he was brought up on charges, well he should have
Speaker 1: been brought up on charges. By the way, you know,
Speaker 1: Adolph Hitler was in jail when he wrote mind cuff.
Speaker 1: So being in jail is not a sufficient.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 1: If anything has strengthened him. So it's we live, indeed,
Speaker 1: as you said, at the very beginning, at a very
Speaker 1: very dangerous time in this country. And I think that
Speaker 1: the key, though is, you know, to get back to
Speaker 1: what we're just saying, before in a democracy, on the
Speaker 1: one hand, different opinions, expression of those different opinions, criticism, argumentation,
Speaker 1: all of that is good and encouraged as long as
Speaker 1: it doesn't entel physical violence. And that right there is
Speaker 1: the crucial difference between a democratic open society and a
Speaker 1: fascist closed society, because once again, you know, if you
Speaker 1: disagree with Biden and you do it peaceably, Biden might
Speaker 1: not like it. Kamala Harris doesn't like the lies that
Speaker 1: are being told about her, but no one is being threatened.
Speaker 3: With violence to stop. Yeah, you know, it's a good,
Speaker 3: good segue to my next question. And I was going
Speaker 3: to use a quote by Winston Churchill on tax but
Speaker 3: I'm going to save that from my final quote because
Speaker 3: I think it sums up a lot of what we're
Speaker 3: talking about. But it's about people that you disagree with
Speaker 3: strongly sometimes and now with Facebook and other social media,
Speaker 3: I mean, the amount of interaction is almost unlimited. You
Speaker 3: have the wall of protection. By the way, I wrote
Speaker 3: an article on that in the Rockland County Business Journal.
Speaker 3: People this week can check it out about civil discourse.
Speaker 3: But what do you do when you run into someone
Speaker 3: who's so adamant that he will not even listen, or
Speaker 3: she they will not listen to logic. There are certain
Speaker 3: logical organizations. But if he does, for example, well, if
Speaker 3: he does a tariff, economists tell you it would not
Speaker 3: be good for the economy, and refuses to hear that,
Speaker 3: do you just drop it? You let it go? And
Speaker 3: I guess we just vote them out of the ballot box.
Speaker 3: But there's got to be mourning within that. What do
Speaker 3: we do pull you're you're a professor, professor of communication,
Speaker 3: tell us how to communicate the pressures.
Speaker 1: Are well, look, it's not easy. I think the key
Speaker 1: is never give in to violence yourself, regardless of how
Speaker 1: outrageous you know some point of view is. I'll tell
Speaker 1: you a true story right now, a recent story, without
Speaker 1: mention this other person's name, as you and your listeners
Speaker 1: must know by now. I'm a science fiction writer in
Speaker 1: addition to the other things I do, and I've been
Speaker 1: writing science fiction for a long time. I was President
Speaker 1: of the Science Fiction Writers of America from nineteen ninety
Speaker 1: eight to two thousand and one. I did that right
Speaker 1: before I came to Fordham. By the way, I don't
Speaker 1: know if forum was preparation for the other but I've
Speaker 1: met a lot of people and made a lot of
Speaker 1: friends and continue these friendships online who are themselves writers.
Speaker 1: And just recently I basically put up a comment. Some
Speaker 1: people probably saw it on Facebook and other places. I
Speaker 1: put it up on LinkedIn on X excuse me, I
Speaker 1: was going to say Twitter. But the comment was not
Speaker 1: a particularly you know, brain comment. But the comment was
Speaker 1: I thought Walls won the debate with Vance, the moment
Speaker 1: he said to Vance, do you think who do you
Speaker 1: think won the twenty twenty election? Did did? Did Trump
Speaker 1: lose the twenty twenty election? And the moment that Vance
Speaker 1: said I don't want to talk about the past, I
Speaker 1: want to talk about the future, and obvious cop out.
Speaker 1: I think that that was a strong part of the debate,
Speaker 1: even though I thought Advance, actually, you know, it was
Speaker 1: pretty cogent, much more cogent than Trump. So I put
Speaker 1: that up and on one of you know, these these
Speaker 1: online sites, one of my old science fiction writer friends says,
Speaker 1: I can't believe you you said that. You know, you
Speaker 1: seem to be supporting Walls and Harris. You know, they
Speaker 1: and Biden have been among the worst people in office.
Speaker 1: And I said to him, so you think Trump did
Speaker 1: a good job, and he said, yeah, I thought Trump
Speaker 1: did a very good job. And so I said, well,
Speaker 1: let me ask you this question. Did Trump win the
Speaker 1: election in twenty twenty or did he lose the election?
Speaker 1: And this writer stopped talking to me, okay, and I
Speaker 1: figured I was trying to decide what to do. I
Speaker 1: was going to block him or whatever, but we go
Speaker 1: back a long way, and so I decided not to
Speaker 1: do anything. And a little thing happened today and not
Speaker 1: on Facebook. So though anyone is on Facebook, don't look
Speaker 1: for it there. It's on another social media side. But
Speaker 1: a little thing happened today. Yesterday, I actually did my
Speaker 1: own podcast interview where a guy by the name of
Speaker 1: Jarrett Van Wutenberg, whose movie Quantum Suicide it's a great movie,
Speaker 1: by the way, is going to on Amazon on Friday,
Speaker 1: and I posted links to it all over and this
Speaker 1: guy that I just told you about, we had that
Speaker 1: very unpleasant exchange. He basically liked and reposted my review.
Speaker 1: So what that tells me is that there's still at
Speaker 1: least a shred of decency in him, and I'm glad
Speaker 1: I restrained myself. I was so close to like cursing
Speaker 1: him out. You know, because it's a very volatile time,
Speaker 1: you know. You know, all of us have very thin skins.
Speaker 1: So I think the answer is, you know, it's not
Speaker 1: a perfect answer. We who pride ourselves as being on
Speaker 1: the side of democracy, being on the side of truth,
Speaker 1: being on the side of nonviolence, have to try to
Speaker 1: resist getting into that arena screaming and yelling and cursing
Speaker 1: people out and certainly resorting, you know, to any violence.
Speaker 1: And you know, so as far as you know Trump
Speaker 1: and these trials are concerned, you know, I want those
Speaker 1: judges to give him the fairest trial possible, you know,
Speaker 1: because if they don't, that pollutes the process in a different.
Speaker 3: Way, right you know, I address that as I said.
Speaker 3: I did an essay for the Rockland County Business Journal,
Speaker 3: and I do start it with that Churchill quote. And
Speaker 3: it's good. I'm teasing and hopefully people will stay for it.
Speaker 3: It's worthwhile because it really and that's part of the
Speaker 3: beauty of it. In a single sentence, it's just so powerful.
Speaker 3: It's humorous, it's vulgar and sublime at the same time.
Speaker 3: We'll talk a little bit about it, and I think
Speaker 3: in a very coaching way to what we were just discussing.
Speaker 3: We also teased a little bit. There have been some
Speaker 3: influential films through the course of years that we can
Speaker 3: discuss and because they do play an important role, films
Speaker 3: can can sway public opinion. So we'll just talk about
Speaker 3: a few of those, have some fun, talk a little
Speaker 3: bit more about what doctor Paul Levinson is up. We
Speaker 3: could do a whole other show just on that, but
Speaker 3: I want to get some of that in as well.
Speaker 3: But we'll take a quick break here, let people regroup,
Speaker 3: get something cool to drink, and we'll be continuing our
Speaker 3: discussion on fashionism and so much more here on Being Frank.
Speaker 3: I'm your host, Frank Lebono. Will be back with more
Speaker 3: of Being Frank just a few minutes. Please don't go
Speaker 3: anywhere yet.
Speaker 1: Hudson River Radio dot com.
Speaker 4: This is Hudson River Radio dot com.
Speaker 1: Hudson River Radio dot com.
Speaker 4: This is Hudson River Radio dot com. Hudson River Radio
Speaker 4: dot com.
Speaker 3: Welcome back to Being Frank, the Intelligentcomversation podcast. Thanks for
Speaker 3: sticking with us. I'm your host, Frank Lebono. You know,
Speaker 3: we bring in an audience a fresh topic every week
Speaker 3: and we stream from Hudson River Radio dot com where
Speaker 3: Neil Richter is our engineer, and it's located in beautiful
Speaker 3: and historic Stony Point, New York. But remember, you can
Speaker 3: catch Being Frank anywhere you get your favorite podcasts, that
Speaker 3: includes Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, and the others. And because it's archived,
Speaker 3: you can listen to any program anytime you like. Find
Speaker 3: a link to Being Frank on the Hudson River Radio
Speaker 3: Facebook page or at our website, Hudson Riverradio dot com.
Speaker 3: Just click and you're there. We're back with our very
Speaker 3: special guest, doctor Paul Levinson, and we're talking about fascism,
Speaker 3: the election, and so much more. And we teas before
Speaker 3: the break. Media on mass media, things like film and television,
Speaker 3: it can have a great effect on society and culture.
Speaker 3: And obviously politics being part of society and culture, films
Speaker 3: have made a great impact on it. In your mind,
Speaker 3: what are some of the more important films that we
Speaker 3: should study when it comes to politics, things like politics, fascism, etc.
Speaker 1: What do you think, pol Well I would start with
Speaker 1: Triumph for the Will and this was the movie that
Speaker 1: Lenny Reefenstahl made in Nazi Germany in the late nineteen thirties.
Speaker 1: As far as its movie making capacity, it is correctly
Speaker 1: regarded as a masterpiece. I mean, she was She lived
Speaker 1: until over one hundred years of age, and so she
Speaker 1: was alive, I think, even into the twenty first century.
Speaker 1: And she received an enormous amount of criticism for that movie,
Speaker 1: obviously from the people who won World War two, thank god,
Speaker 1: you know, the good guys. And there has been a
Speaker 1: split in cinematic studies among people who say, you can't
Speaker 1: give more than a Nazi sympathizer, a Nazi supporter who
Speaker 1: used her talent in movie making to make this movie
Speaker 1: any kind of honor, any kind of position in a
Speaker 1: university or you know, an honorable position in an organization.
Speaker 1: And on the other hand, there are people who say, well, look,
Speaker 1: maybe it doesn't matter what her politics were, what her
Speaker 1: movie was about. We're talking about her talent as a filmmaker.
Speaker 1: But I highly recommend the movie for anyone who wants
Speaker 1: to get an idea way way back then, like over
Speaker 1: ninety years ago, about how even with the limited knowledge
Speaker 1: and the limited technology they had back then, she was
Speaker 1: able to make such a powerful movie. And what I'm
Speaker 1: talking about is scenes of Adolf Hitler, who's a raving
Speaker 1: lunatic of course, giving a speech, and it basically, you know,
Speaker 1: pans out from Hitler to little German girls and little
Speaker 1: German boys with beautiful flowers and the sunsetting, you know,
Speaker 1: or rising or shining or whatever it was. And it
Speaker 1: was not a short movie either, but that has to
Speaker 1: go down in history as one of the most effective
Speaker 1: vehicles of propaganda in Germany. While we're on the subject
Speaker 1: of Nati Germany, I have to cite The Man in
Speaker 1: the High Castle, which is an alternate history story, not
Speaker 1: a true story. It was a novel published by written
Speaker 1: by Philip K. Dick in the nineteen sixties, won the
Speaker 1: Hugo Award. But we're talking about things on the screen.
Speaker 1: Amazon Prime Video, to its credit, one of the first
Speaker 1: things that they brought onto their screens in just you know,
Speaker 1: literally about ten years ago, was a television series, The
Speaker 1: Man in the High Castle, and it was, I think
Speaker 1: still to this day, one of the best series ever
Speaker 1: on television. And it basically tells the story what would
Speaker 1: the United States be like today had Nazi Germany in
Speaker 1: Japan won World War Two? You know, it plays that
Speaker 1: alternate history game. And again, in terms of what we
Speaker 1: were talking about a little earlier. You know, you could
Speaker 1: say that it's not Germany that's winning World War Two,
Speaker 1: it's the danger of Donald Trump and the Maga Republicans
Speaker 1: getting into power the results of the twenty twenty four election
Speaker 1: that could create a fascist state right here in the
Speaker 1: United States. So this movie, this alternate history movie, provides
Speaker 1: a good tableau of what we might have to go
Speaker 1: through as long as we're talking about books made into movies.
Speaker 1: Nineteen eighty four, of course, is George Orwell's masterpiece book,
Speaker 1: and again it explores after World War Two, what the
Speaker 1: world would be like if there were just three fascist
Speaker 1: states in power in the world. In the fascist state
Speaker 1: in which the novel takes place, the hero of the
Speaker 1: novel tries in his own way to have some individual life,
Speaker 1: but the state ultimately crushes him. In the end, he
Speaker 1: realizes the only private space that he can have is
Speaker 1: what is inside his head but never communicated to anyone.
Speaker 1: And that's you know, brought out very effectively in the movie.
Speaker 1: All the President's Men is another, you know, important movie. This,
Speaker 1: of course, is the Woodward and Bernstein story.
Speaker 3: And the Truth based on a true story.
Speaker 1: True story, how they stopped another unfortunately Republican president who
Speaker 1: if he were alive, he'd probably be happy about Trump
Speaker 1: because now people aren't saying he Richard Nixon was the
Speaker 1: worst president. So so Trump at least did Nixon's memory
Speaker 1: a favor. And the truth is, look, Nixon was noway
Speaker 1: nearly as bad and dangerous as Trump has been and
Speaker 1: still is. But he was beginning, he was on his way.
Speaker 1: You know, the idea of the plumbers undermining the you know,
Speaker 1: the democratic candidacy, which they didn't have to do because
Speaker 1: McGovern lost by a landslide anyway. Yeah, but that but
Speaker 1: that's again the beginning. It's basically tilting which should be
Speaker 1: a fair election, uh to. What Nixon wanted to do
Speaker 1: is ensure that that he won the election a very
Speaker 1: insecure man, and he was beginning to set in motion.
Speaker 1: Again I wouldn't call him quite yet fascist. He didn't
Speaker 1: kill anyone, but but he was on the road to fascism.
Speaker 1: And that movie is a great movie about how the
Speaker 1: American journalistic system your freedom of the press, you know,
Speaker 1: and that's why you and I have talked so much
Speaker 1: about the First Amendment. That is one of the great
Speaker 1: ballwarks we have, uh for stopping fascism. And you know
Speaker 1: the and this is why, you know, it's always a
Speaker 1: tough decision, Uh, should our government ever stop anything? And
Speaker 1: as you know, we've talked about this many times. Anytime
Speaker 1: the government prevents anything from being communicated, however justified that
Speaker 1: might seem, it's nonetheless a step on the road to fascism.
Speaker 1: And again, Lewis Brandeis often said that the best way
Speaker 1: of countering a false statement is not to censor it,
Speaker 1: because that just presses it, pushes it underground or come
Speaker 1: up again, but to leave it out there in the
Speaker 1: open so people can defeat it with the truth. And
Speaker 1: I always thought that was a great idea and a
Speaker 1: great and very important thing to do. That's why, by
Speaker 1: the way, you know, and again you know this shows
Speaker 1: and you made this point before, the Democrats are not
Speaker 1: completely innocent of fascistic instincts. And I would say probably
Speaker 1: the single worst thing that Joe Biden did and the
Speaker 1: Democrats in Congress did is past that idiotic law that
Speaker 1: and Biden signed it into law that early in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty five. If China does not divest itself of TikTok
Speaker 1: is going to be banned in the United States and
Speaker 1: a lot of people who don't understand the First Amendment
Speaker 1: and say, well, hey, that doesn't protect China, so right,
Speaker 1: it's not China's rights that are being violated here that
Speaker 1: I care about. It's every American who gets joy out
Speaker 1: of using TikTok, every American who has a business makes
Speaker 1: money on TikTok, etc et cetera. And again, it might
Speaker 1: seem like an overreaction, but I'm very disappointed that the
Speaker 1: Democrats joined the Republicans and Biden signed it into law,
Speaker 1: because every time you censor something, even if it's justified,
Speaker 1: you are taking a step towards fascism.
Speaker 3: Pull any other films you want to highlight. I have
Speaker 3: one I want to bounce off you if it was
Speaker 3: It's a little bit of an offbeat selection, but it
Speaker 3: keeps coming to my mind. The great Stanley Kubrick World
Speaker 3: War One drama Paths of Glory. Not directly a political movie,
Speaker 3: but considering what we were talking about the state of
Speaker 3: affairs in Europe at the time, very much about the
Speaker 3: Old Guard and keeping that intact, and the pushback by
Speaker 3: the Colonel Dax I believe, played by Kirk Douglas, who
Speaker 3: pushes back and says, you're disgusting, old man, You're vile.
Speaker 3: This is a new world. You won't exist much longer.
Speaker 3: So anyway, it comes to mind, as I said, especially
Speaker 3: in light of the transition that Europe was making, that
Speaker 3: brought about at least the pushback against the monarchy and
Speaker 3: the old guard. And unfortunately, as we talked about it,
Speaker 3: in many ways, it got perverted. It was on the
Speaker 3: right path for a while, but powerful men, as they
Speaker 3: often do, pervert it. So your your thoughts.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, listen, Stanley Kubrick, your example is an excellent example.
Speaker 1: Even his Doctor Strange Love is really a movie. It's
Speaker 1: it's Doctor Strangelove is about the absurdity of fascism because
Speaker 1: it's absurd and it winds up destroying itself and it
Speaker 1: could destroy the world. And so among the many absurdities,
Speaker 1: somehow when these people get into power, that they do
Speaker 1: crazy things that actually endanger themselves. And that's why, you know,
Speaker 1: in addition to everything else, you know, anybody who supports
Speaker 1: fascism is actually supporting their own destruction. So it's a
Speaker 1: self destructing phenomenon. But it brings down a lot of
Speaker 1: good people also.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, that's one of the things that I mentioned.
Speaker 3: Like many viruses, they kill their own host. Fascism in
Speaker 3: a sense, kills its own host. It abuses its own
Speaker 3: people to the point there may be a few survivors,
Speaker 3: but the rest, you know, we'll live in kind of misery.
Speaker 3: Are there any other films that you feel you really
Speaker 3: want to make a point of Before we close.
Speaker 1: Out, I'll just make one other point, you know, and
Speaker 1: you know again, uh, you know, this speaks to my
Speaker 1: love of science fiction. If you think about the essence
Speaker 1: of Star Wars, right, there are good people who are fighting.
Speaker 3: Them, loving people and oppressors. It's all right there, you're
Speaker 3: right now, It's all right there.
Speaker 1: That's right. I mean, Darth Vader is the ultimate fascist,
Speaker 1: right that it destroys his enemies, you know, you know,
Speaker 1: kills them, you know right, bates them a little bit
Speaker 1: in the conversation, and then kills them so well.
Speaker 3: Paul, I always teach you that you're always up to
Speaker 3: so much. And you mentioned your alternate history of the Beatles,
Speaker 3: which is always doing very well. You just had a
Speaker 3: book signing here at Nayak at the Red Bookstore. Uh,
Speaker 3: so you're you're always busy. What do you want what
Speaker 3: do you want to highlight today?
Speaker 1: Listen, I'm still talking about about that alternate history uh
Speaker 1: book novel because it's getting a lot of great response.
Speaker 1: And and as I've said, I think a couple of
Speaker 1: months ago, there are a couple of like film possibilities brewing,
Speaker 1: but I don't want to mention names. Uh. As I
Speaker 1: said earlier, Apapol film something that I didn't do, but
Speaker 1: I I'm gonna give believe it or not. Probably this
Speaker 1: is the first time in my life, let alone on
Speaker 1: your podcast, I've ever used this opportunity to plug somebody else.
Speaker 1: But I do want to say I mentioned his name
Speaker 1: for Jarrett van Wudenberg. He uh made this movie and
Speaker 1: it's a out multiverses, and you know, it's called quantum suicide.
Speaker 1: For those people who know physics, there's like like a
Speaker 1: Schrodinger's cat thing, where you know, it's like a quantum
Speaker 1: mechanical thing. Is the cat alive, is the cat dead?
Speaker 1: Et cetera, et cetera. Well, quantum suicide is the same
Speaker 1: kind of thing, but it makes the human being the subject,
Speaker 1: not the cat, and in particularly the human being who
Speaker 1: is doing the experiments. So if you like that kind
Speaker 1: of science, fiction. I highly recommend it. And actually, okay,
Speaker 1: I just threw away how I can plug myself. I
Speaker 1: see especially, I could never forgiven myself if I hadn't
Speaker 1: used this opportunity.
Speaker 5: One of the reasons why I love this movie is
Speaker 5: I had a story that was published in the mid
Speaker 5: nineteen nineties called The Chronology Protection Case, which also was
Speaker 5: a science fiction story that dealt with a slightly different
Speaker 5: aspect of quantum mechanics.
Speaker 1: And in two thousand and two, a guy by the
Speaker 1: name of Jay Kensenger. You and your listeners will love
Speaker 1: this story. I come in to teach at Fort University
Speaker 1: and I find a package in the mailbox addressed to me,
Speaker 1: and there's a videotape in there, and there's a letter,
Speaker 1: and the letter is from Ja Kensenger. I don't know
Speaker 1: him from Adam, And he says, Dear Paul Levinson, I'm
Speaker 1: going to tell you right up front, I made a movie,
Speaker 1: a short film, out of your story. And I know
Speaker 1: I never asked your permission. I don't have a contract.
Speaker 1: You know you didn't sign. And the only reason why
Speaker 1: I'm doing this I wasn't going to tell you, but
Speaker 1: I ran into Greg Behar, a great science fiction writer, unfortunately,
Speaker 1: who's no longer with us, but Jay kensingeren two thousand
Speaker 1: and two, he says, I ran to Bear and I said,
Speaker 1: I have a problem. Can you help me with it?
Speaker 1: And Grex, what's the problem? And Jay Kensinger said, I
Speaker 1: made this little movie based on Paul Levinson's novel and
Speaker 1: I didn't let him know about it. I'm afraid he's
Speaker 1: going to sue me. I mean, what should I do?
Speaker 1: And Greg Bear left and said, are you kidding? You
Speaker 1: don't know Paul Levinson. He'll do nothing but be thrilled
Speaker 1: about the fact that you made this movie. Anyway. The
Speaker 1: movie The Chronology Protection Case is available on Amazon Prime
Speaker 1: Video right now. You can see it for free, and
Speaker 1: I'll do that, yeah.
Speaker 3: If you like.
Speaker 1: And it actually stars Jay Kenzinger and a couple of
Speaker 1: other people as doctor Phil Dematto, who I created him
Speaker 1: as a character. Doctor Phil Demotto went on to appear
Speaker 1: in two other stories, The Copyright Notice Case and The
Speaker 1: Mendelian Lamp Case. Then in three novels I wrote, The
Speaker 1: sol Code, The Consciousness Plague, and the pixele So how's
Speaker 1: that the self promotion.
Speaker 3: Most impressive as it always is, Paul, We could do
Speaker 3: that we could certainly do the whole show. I just
Speaker 3: thinks that you're up to but we have to wrap
Speaker 3: up at some point. And of course we want to
Speaker 3: thank you for being Frank, as you always hear with
Speaker 3: your intelligent conversation. You're You're always welcome back, Doctor Paul
Speaker 3: Evinson and Fordham University, Thank you, Paul.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I'm here because being Frank is the only
Speaker 1: way to be.
Speaker 3: I beg a lot, and of course we offer special
Speaker 3: thanks to our listeners who take time in their lives
Speaker 3: to give us a voice. Remember, we offer fresh topic
Speaker 3: every weekend. You can catch us wherever and whenever you
Speaker 3: get your favorite podcasts, check us out on the Hudson
Speaker 3: River Radio Facebook page. You know, we leave you with
Speaker 3: a slogan and a song. And again it's one of
Speaker 3: the reasons I love having Paul on because he brings
Speaker 3: his own music with him. So I'll let him introduce that.
Speaker 3: But before, as advertised, a quote from Winston Churchill, and
Speaker 3: I think sums all this up when he said, tact
Speaker 3: is the ability to tell someone to go to hell
Speaker 3: in such a way that they look forward to the trip.
Speaker 3: Pretty much says it all, doesn't it. Paul what are
Speaker 3: we going to hear? What music are you bringing us today?
Speaker 1: You're going to hear one of my favorite songs. I'm
Speaker 1: surprised I didn't give it to you sooner, Samantha. And
Speaker 1: you might think, well, it's just a woman's name, so
Speaker 1: but this is a song about love across alternate realities.
Speaker 1: And I started writing the song about twenty years ago,
Speaker 1: when I knew I was going to be recording Welcome
Speaker 1: Up Songs of Space and Time back in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 1: I realized I ought to finish this song up. So
Speaker 1: I wrote the words and the music and it's my
Speaker 1: most I don't know, you know, some of my earlier
Speaker 1: songs I saw have soft love songs. This is like
Speaker 1: my hardest edgy.
Speaker 3: I listen to it, got a ledge to it. Yes, yeah, excellent,
Speaker 3: All right, Doctor Paul Levinson as a master, maestro, composer,
Speaker 3: musician and uh an always welcome guest here at Being Frank.
Speaker 3: I'm your host, Frank Leblona for our engineer, the mailman,
Speaker 3: mister Neil Richter. We hope to see you on the
Speaker 3: next Being Frank. We're the only way to be is.
Speaker 2: Frank, Samantha Cadgers.
Speaker 1: There's no way.
Speaker 2: Forward. Yeah that Seba Samantha fathers so sweet, waits free
Speaker 2: those bast not much we can do. You come from
Speaker 2: the all D D shot. That's what makes you so ok.
Speaker 2: That's what puts me off to see you come from me.
Speaker 2: Got a stop chever. Don't pull you back that head
Speaker 2: and eye. I pull you back that I had died.
Speaker 3: Some mad that.
Speaker 2: Tess with me about I don't think that would be
Speaker 2: off the phone next year because you're won't be in it.
Speaker 2: It's a bad that you too. We can't trip way autist.
Speaker 3: It won't be.
Speaker 1: If you really.
Speaker 2: Your love just WoT survive and sport show it does
Speaker 2: now with feeling all the manadays is way.
Speaker 1: Your love just an hour starch show. I can't do that.
Speaker 2: Time and you get to love crime just be hout
Speaker 2: to some man tregos weak inside. We can't twistad shot.
Speaker 1: Hudson River Radio dot com