Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Scientists aren’t sure why our eyes move rapidly during sleep. A new study offers a novel theory

During the tranquil one-third of our lives that we spend asleep, the human body does something that might not seem restful at all: REM sleep, short for rapid eye movement, is a phase of sleep that consumes 90 to 120 minutes of an adult human's day and as much as nine whole hours for a newborn baby. In this phase of sleep, your eyes twitch randomly and repeatedly, and sleepers have their most vivid dreams; people awakened from REM sleep often feel as though they really happened. Scientists note that parts of the neocortex, which is associated with higher forms of thinking, begin to activate seemingly at random.

Though REM is only a minority constituent of the time spent sleeping, it is perhaps the most enigmatic stage. What the purpose and function of REM sleep is, and why we do it, is still a mystery. 

Now, a new study published in the scientific journal Neuron suggests that REM sleep may have evolved to help us protect ourselves from predators. In other words, it is a remnant of an earlier stage of human evolution, in which hominids had to be on the lookout for danger everywhere, even — perhaps especially — at night. 

RELATED: Why do electronic gadgets scramble our sleep?

Dr. Wang Liping from the Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology (SIAT) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences led a research team that placed animal subjects in a sealed chamber and monitored their brain activity as they slept. In order to simulate the feeling of believing a predator is nearby, they exposed the animals to the odor of trimethylthiazoline, which is similar to the odor of a predator. By doing this to different animals during various stages of their sleep cycles, they were able to compare how quickly the animals were aroused from their slumber based on which phase they were in. As it turned out, animals were more quick to be aroused if they were in a REM cycle than if they were in an NREM (not REM) cycle.

The scientists also found something interesting in the brain of those animals who were exposed to a "predator" during the REM cycle of their sleep. Neurons in a region of the brain called the medial subthalamic nucleus, and which produce a hormone associated with stress called corticotropin, gave their animal hosts a lower threshold for waking up than the animals who in NREM sleep. Those animals were also more likely to have highly defensive responses after being aroused.

"Together, our findings suggest adaptive REM-sleep responses could be protective against threats and uncover a critical component of the neural circuitry at their basis," the authors conclude. Their findings have implications for treating mood disorders and other conditions that could be related to a neurological linkage between sleep and fear.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

This is not the first study to link REM sleep to defense against predators. A 2013 paper in the journal Dreaming by Ionnanis Tsoukalas of Stockholm University in Sweden hypothesized that many of the physical states associated with REM sleep are similar to tonic immobility, or the state in which animals pretend to be dead and therefore seem unappealing to predators they can neither fight nor outrun. Tsoukalas notes that people in REM sleep cannot move, which is similar to how some animals freeze when frightened, and people in REM sleep also share tonic immobility traits like altered breathing and heart rates, altered thermoregulation, suppression of reflexes and even extra "theta" waves in one's EEG patterns (these are derived from the hippocampus and are linked to spatial awareness and memory). According to this hypothesis, even the vivid dreams we experience during REM sleep could simply be our brain sorting out potential threats.

There are many other purposes to REM sleep. Scientists have demonstrated that REM sleep is linked to consolidating spatial and contextual memories, and it is generally agreed that babies have more REM sleep in adults because their brains are in such a highly formative stage in their development. REM sleep is also linked to heightened creativity, with a 2018 article in the journal Trends in Cognitive Sciences advancing a novel theory: That NREM sleep is a period in which the brain begins a process of problem solving by separating important information from mere noise, and then REM sleep completes it by searching abstractly through that information to find possible connections.

More stories on the science of sleep:

This imposter fooled a Scottish school and became a popular student in fascinating “My Old School”

Jono McLeod’s beguiling documentary, “My Old School,” recounts the strange-but-true story of his classmate, Brandon Lee. The film, which is having its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, employs a variety of techniques to retell what transpired when Brandon Lee entered Bearsden Academy, a secondary school in the Glasgow suburbs nearly 30 years ago. (And yes, there is a discussion of him sharing the name of the late Bruce Lee‘s son).

McLeod explains that while the subject of his film will not show his face, he has recorded an audio interview with Brandon which is lip-synched by actor Alan Cumming. Animation is used to depict various scenes described from 1993, the time of Brandon’s enrollment. Interviews with the now-adult classmates allow the students to give their impressions then and now about their unusual classmate. Eventually, video recordings, news footage, and photographs are used to round out the picture of who Brandon Lee was and is. 

“My Old School” is, not surprisingly, the case of an imposter, and much of the film raises the question about the reasons behind the lies and deception, which are made clear over the course of the film. McLeod drops some shrewd clues throughout the film that hint at the truth, and yes, he does include a bit of misdirection at time, which will delight (or enrage) viewers.

RELATED: Alan Cumming: “Life’s just the same show with different costumes” 

The story is fascinating. Brandon Lee enters Bearsden in 1993 as a 5th year student. He has come from Canada — hence his “unplaceable” accent — after his mother, an opera singer, died in a car crash; his face was scared in the wreck. He is now living with his grandmother in Bearsden, as he has little to no association with his father, who is in England. Yes, he looks a bit older — the first years tease him and call him “thirtysomething” — but Brandon soon becomes BMOC. He befriends Stefen, a student who received racist hate mail, and assists him with his homework. He helps Brian change his musical tastes from the unpopular techno to cooler bands. He even taught the biology teacher something about male reproduction. His insights about “Death of a Salesman,” impressed everyone, and made him a natural for the lead in the school’s production of “South Pacific.” When the show was staged, it was quite memorable. 

Brandon’s popularity soared even higher when some of his classmates saw him driving. A car was an opportunity to get out of town, and Brandon cheerfully drove folks to Glasgow for a night of fun. When a cop was following them one evening, Brandon told his peers, that his license was under another name so not to say anything if the cops mentioned it. This might have sent up a red flag, but it wasn’t until a holiday trip Brandon took with three classmates that the truth about his identity, concealed in a second passport, became known.

McLeod certainly has fun spinning this yarn of hiding in plain sight, and it is hard not to get caught up in the deception — even as viewers wonder why folks did not figure out the truth sooner. Or, how it could have gotten as far as it did without some complicity. McLeod provides answers that explain if not excuse the behavior on display.

But the real point of the film may be what it is that folks remember, and how much of that is true. Case in point: In the production of “South Pacific,” many interviewees describe the kiss Brandon (reluctantly) gave his female co-star. What they believed was, in fact, quite different from reality. Are people more apt to look back at their teenage years, however awkward, through a different lens? Or do we blind ourselves to the truth for reasons that may only be known to us? 

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

“My Old School” also suggests that folks see what they want to see even when confronted with evidence to the contrary. (Insert lesson here about applying logic and reason to people.) Several interviewees, including Brandon, talk about his mesmeric effect on people, insinuating that he hypnotized folks into believing what he wanted them to. (This is used to explain why he could enroll in Bearsden without a birth certificate).  

After the subterfuge is common knowledge, McLeod asks his classmates if they would trust Brandon had he pursued his chosen career. There are several responses for and against, which indicate the impact of his fraud. But what Brandon did was not necessarily illegal; he did not gain financially from his trickery. Moreover, students like Stefen and Brian emphasize that he improved their lives through their friendships. Was harm actually done? 

“My Old School” does pull the rug out from under some of the folks at Bearsden who were fooled by Brandon’s scam, which is both satisfying and rather sad. McLeod’s documentary may not leave viewers as gobsmacked as Brandon did when his ruse was revealed, but this improbablw story is also too good not to be shared.

“My Old School” made its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival.

More stories to check out:

Cozy up to this new chicken and wild mushroom stew with schmaltzy croutons

A few weeks ago, I set out to make the perfect mid-winter chicken stew. I wanted something that was herby, woodsy and deeply savory — the kind of recipe I could see myself making if I finally decamped to an isolated cabin at the edge of some spooky woods (one of my enduring pandemic-era fantasies).

With that as my inspiration, I quickly cobbled together the ingredient list: flavorful skin-on chicken thighs, earthy mushrooms and carrots, smoky paprika and delicate, buttery leeks. While tarragon is typically associated with springtime dishes, it adds a really lovely, subtle anise-like flavor that underscores the richness of the stew — especially when paired with a splash of acidity from dry white wine.

RELATED: New year, new chicken and noodle casserole? Revamping the Midwestern staple

The best part of the recipe? The homemade schmaltzy croutons that get added as the stew is ladled into individual bowls. Schmaltz, or rendered chicken fat, is an ingredient that’s common in Eatern European and Jewish cooking. Basically liquid gold, it can be bought in small tubs from most butcher counters. Use it to add a luxe savoriness to everything from potatoes to fried bits of bread.

***

Recipe: Chicken and Wild Mushroom Stew with Schmaltzy Croutons 

Yields
8 servings
Prep Time
30 minutes
Cook Time
45 minutes

Ingredients

  • 2 tablespoons olive oil
  • 2 teaspoons smoked paprika 
  • 1 pound bone-in, skin-on chicken thighs 
  • 2 tablespoons butter
  • 2 leeks — just the white and light green portions — finely chopped 
  • 2 cloves garlic, minced
  • 8 ounces mixed wild mushrooms (blends like this are often available at the supermarket)
  • 1/2 cup dry white wine 
  • 4 cups chicken stock
  • 2 carrots, chopped 
  • 2 tablespoons fresh tarragon 
  • 1 tablespoon of schmaltz 
  • 1/2 cup bread, torn 
  • Salt and pepper to taste 
  • Chopped parsley for garnish 

 

Directions

  1. Pat the chicken thighs dry with a paper towel. Salt and pepper evenly before seasoning with smoked paprika. In a large Dutch oven, heat the olive oil over medium high heat. Sear the chicken thighs skin-side down until the skin gets brown and no longer sticks to the pot — about 4 minutes — before flipping and sautéing until completely cooked.
  2. Remove the chicken from the pot and set aside.
  3. Add the butter to the pot, followed by the garlic and chopped leeks. Allow them to cook until just softened, then add the mixed wild mushrooms. Add salt and pepper to taste and sauté until the mushrooms are slightly browned and the entire mixture is fragrant, about 5 minutes.
  4. Add the wine to the pot and stir, really taking care to scrape up the browned bits from the chicken and alliums (that’s where a lot of flavor is found). Bring the mixture to a simmer and allow it to reduce by half. Add the chicken stock, carrots and tarragon and continue to let the pot simmer.
  5. Meanwhile, shred or cube the chicken thighs. Feel free to discard the skins (or save them to render your own schmaltz!), incorporate them into the stew or fry them as a crispy topping. Add the chicken to the stew and continue to simmer while making the croutons.
  6. In a shallow pan, melt 1 tablespoon of schmaltz. Use it to toast the torn bread until golden brown. Rest your croutons on a paper towel to drain any excess fat and season with salt and pepper.
  7. Divide the soup in bowls and top with croutons and chopped parsley. 

More super simple recipes to make this week: 

Salon Food writes about stuff we think you’ll like. Salon has affiliate partnerships, so we may get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

Examining “what consent means” for a teenage girl in audacious “Palm Trees and Power Lines”

Jamie Dack’s auspicious, audacious feature debut, “Palm Trees and Power Lines,” artfully tackles that very delicate subject of teenage female sexuality. The film, which Dack says is an adaptation (not an expansion) of her 2018 short of the same name, just had its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival. 

Lea (Lily McInerny) is an aimless and restless teenager waiting for something to happen one summer. She hangs out with her friend Amber (Quinn Frankel), as well as some guys from school, but when she meets Tom (Jonathan Tucker of “Westworld“) outside a restaurant — and he accompanies her home — something sparks, and she is drawn to him like a magnet. Yes, Tom is charming, seductive, and twice Lea’s age, and Lea gives him her number because she is anxious to meet up with him again. 

RELATED: The six ways we talk about a teenage girl’s age

“Palm Trees and Power Lines” is very much in the vein of Joyce Chopra’s seminal film, “Smooth Talk,” and as in that drama, Dack conveys the power dynamics between a much older male and a teenage female. Dack also deftly captures the tensions between Lea and her single mother (Gretchen Mol, “Boardwalk Empire“), but her strength as a filmmaker is depicting the tonal and emotional shifts as the relationship between Tom and the teenage Lea becomes more intimate and intense.

The filmmaker spoke with Salon during the Sundance Film Festival about her canny debut. 

Can you talk about your approach to depicting teenage female sexuality? I’m curious about the tone here.

The entire film is grounded in Lea’s perspective, including the way we shot it — she is in every scene. I want people to see her perspective. One thing that was very intentional was that I did not want Lea to be a virgin who loses her virginity to this older man. She is a sexually active teenage girl. 

The camera at times objectifies the girls emphasizing their youth and vulnerability, whereas Tom’s character exudes magnetism, eroticism, and power. Can you talk about creating those very potent images?

I definitely did not want to sexualize the girls. I was very conscious that I was making a film that while our actress was 22, she was portraying a 17-year-old. It was very delicate. The themes of my film — Lea’s boredom — meant there were going to be scenes of her tanning. Teenagers wear skimpy bathing suits, and that was true to life. I love those scenes where she is tanning, but I really didn’t want to sexualize them. If there are moments where they feel sexualized, I like that they are in contrast with other moments where Lea looks like a little girl. She’s dressed in a baggy vintage t-shirt or carries herself in a very childlike way. That contrast — she is old enough to get into this relationship with [Tom], and have this situation happen — but she’s a child. Regarding Tom, it was so weird for me to go into the casting and say he has to be attractive. But that had to be one of the physical characteristics; it is part of what draws her in. It’s not the only thing, by any means, but it is critical. The shot at the beach, where we pan up his body is the female gaze of what she is seeing.

You expanded your short for this feature. Was it always your intention to tell this particular story? What prompted you to take the direction you did in the film? 

Shorts, by nature, are obviously condensed. In successful shorts, you can only tackle a few things. I made my short about my experiences as a teenage girl and some relationships I had — being in suburbia, and being bored, and insecure, and lonely. I didn’t make the short as a proof of concept for a feature, but even as I was making it, I knew I had only just touched on some of these themes from my life. I began writing the [feature] script after the short premiered. In the short, Tom was supposed to be as old as he is in the feature, but I hadn’t found the right person. When I wrote the feature, it was clear he was double her age. I toyed with him being in his 40s — that was a very important part of the story — and his manipulation of her and his grooming tactics were going to be a big part of the plot. Writing this and exploring my own experiences allowed me to use the protagonist as a proxy for my younger self — what had happened to me, and what could have happened, or could have gone wrong.

Lea is really malleable. She can come across as a dreamer with desires that may not match her reality. She trusts Tom, even though his behavior raises a couple of red flags. We root for her and ache for her as she makes bad decisions, but she is young and testing her limits. What do you want viewers to think about Lea? 

A huge concern for me in the writing was: I don’t want people to think Lea is dumb. She is a teenager. Her brains, impulse control, and decision-making are not fully developed. In Lea’s case, her father is absent. Her mother is there, but not really. She doesn’t totally fit in with her friends, she feels isolated. In my opinion, it is this perfect storm of step up that leads her right to Tom’s manipulation. Hopefully, even if [viewers] have some sort of judgment about her, they also are able to understand what he did, how he did it, the order he did it, and get how she ends up there. 

This is a story that shows a young woman who is navigating treacherous territory with the boundaries of sexuality. What decisions did you make about what is appropriate, what is consensual, when and how, and what lines to cross?

I really think that there is going to be — and I want there to be — a dialogue around what consent means in this film. Technically, Lea says “OK,” but does she really say OK? I don’t want to express my opinion about what I think this means. All I want to say is that there are so many things about this film that will be controversial for certain people but that is the crux of it. We tried an edit of that scene where she nods and doesn’t say, “OK.” It says “OK” in the script. It is all the more complicated and all the more powerful that she speaks the words OK, but I don’t believe that she has given [consent].

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

How did you work with Lily McInerny on portraying Lea and what did you discuss with Jonathan Tucker to make their relationship feel both real and creepy? 

Lily read script, and we met up, and I was immediately vulnerable with her with specific details of my personal experiences. If I was ever going to ask someone to do what she was going to do in this film I wanted to bare my soul to her. She in return shared a bunch of experiences with me of ways she related to this character. We talked about Lea and developed this love for her and felt protective of her, and it was me wanting to protect my younger self.

With Jonathan and Lily, it was a challenge to create the tension because we couldn’t shoot in order. I needed to create intense intimacy and comfort between then, but I needed them to be completely uncomfortable for [other] scenes. At times, I had to physically distance them and tell Lily, “Don’t look at him.” I joke that Jonathan could be cult leader. He is a charismatic, charming person. He was perfect for the role.

Lea thinks she can control things but may not be equipped to handle all she encounters. What do you want audiences to take away from Lea’s experiences? 

I want people to understand how this happens; that this manipulation is a lot closer to our realities than people think. Please think this happens to someone else, somewhere else. People would watch the short — an insanely tamed-down version of this — and I lost track of how many people told me they related to this story. So many women have experienced something like this, whether in a small way or unfortunately, in a rather concrete way. I want people to feel they were represented and that this is a story they can relate to that they wouldn’t normally get to see.

More stories to read:

Wisconsin Republicans pass bill allowing some high school students to bring a gun to campus

Wisconsin Republicans just passed a spate of gun rights measures that include lowering the state’s concealed carry age requirement from 21 to 18, effectively allowing high school students to carry firearms on school grounds.

The decision was approved by the state assembly last Thursday as part of an ongoing Second Amendment push by the lower chamber’s GOP majority. 

“If you’re old enough to fight for your country, [if] you’re old enough to sign contracts, if you’re old enough to decide who the president of the United States is, we think you’re old enough to be responsible with your rights and to be able to protect yourself,” Republican Rep. Shae Sortwell of Gibson, the bill’s chief sponsor, said last week. 

Guns are typically banned on school property in Wisconsin, but according to The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, one of the measures would do away with this convention. The bills would also allow Wisconsinites with concealed carry licenses to bring firearms into churches as well as permit out-of-staters with a concealed carry license to bring guns into the Badger State, according to the Associated Press. 

Wisconsin Democrats, for their part, have railed against the legislative package amid the national uptick in gun violence. The Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission recorded a total of 857 nonfatal shootings in 2021 – about 93% more than that of 2019.  

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

“Guns do not belong anywhere in or near schools,” said Democratic state Rep. Deb Andraca. “Collectively, what these bills would do, they would allow high school seniors to carry a loaded gun in the car to school grounds [and] at school events.”

Democratic state Rep. Lisa Subeck likewise questioned whether guns “make people feel safer,” saying, “In this state, you can get a concealed carry permit and never once get any hands-on firing a gun and that’s terrifying.”

RELATED: Wisconsin GOP proposes bill that would allow toddlers to hunt using guns

Jeri Bonavia, executive director of Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort (WAVE), a grassroots organization aimed at curtailing gun violence, has also opposed the bills, suggesting that they flout federal law around gun sales.

Because no one under 21 is allowed to legally purchase a firearm from a federally licensed gun dealer, Bonavia told an NBC Chicago affiliate, “this age group that they’re talking about would likely need to be purchasing their gun from the gray market, from private sellers,” adding: “Which means that there would be no background check conducted on those purchases.”

All of the measures were passed in the Assembly with a voice vote, sending the package to the Wisconsin Senate. If the state Senate approves, the package will need to be signed by Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat who is likely to veto the measures. While the governor has not directly commented on the package, in the past he’s pushed for gun control measures, such as universal background checks and red flag laws.

RELATED: Man who gave Kyle Rittenhouse his rifle faces $2K fine, but will have felony charges dismissed

Evan Rachel Wood alleges Marilyn Manson raped her on camera: “No one was looking after me”

Evan Rachel Wood has revealed more about her allegations of sexual abuse against Marilyn Manson, this time through a powerful documentary.

In the first part of her two-part documentary “Phoenix Rising,” the actor and musician alleged that she was “essentially raped on camera” by Manson while filming his 2007 music video “Heart-Shaped Glasses,” Variety reported.

“It’s nothing like I thought it was going to be,” Wood said in the documentary, which premiered Sunday night at the Sundance Film Festival, per Rolling Stone. “We’re doing things that were not what was pitched to me. We had discussed a simulated sex scene, but once the cameras were rolling, he started penetrating me for real. I had never agreed to that . . . It was complete chaos. I did not feel safe.

“No one was looking after me. It was a really traumatizing experience filming the video,” she continued. “I didn’t know how to advocate for myself or know how to say no because I had been conditioned and trained to never talk back — to just soldier through. I felt disgusting and that I had done something shameful and I could tell that the crew was uncomfortable and nobody knew what to do.”

RELATED: “Game of Thrones” actress Esmé Bianco sues Marilyn Manson for sexual assault and battery

In the music video, Wood wears a pair of heart shaped sunglasses that resemble the shades worn by Vladimir Nabokov’s titular character, Lolita, in the 1962 Stanley Kubrick film adaptation of the same name. The “Westworld” star also engages in sex with Manson while fake blood rains down on the pair.

In “Phoenix Rising,” Wood claims she was fed absinthe on set until she was “barely conscious to object when Manson had sex with her on camera,” according to Variety.

“I was supposed to tell people we had this great, romantic time and none of that was the truth,” Wood added. “But I was scared to do anything that would upset Brian in any way. The video was just the beginning of the violence that would keep escalating over the course of the relationship.”

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Wood and Manson’s relationship became public in January 2007 — at that time, Wood was 19 years old while Manson was 38. The pair was engaged in 2010 but ended their relationship seven months later.

In 2018, Wood testified before the House Judiciary Committee about her experiences with sexual assault and abuse: “It started slow but escalated over time, including threats against my life, severe gaslighting and brainwashing, [and] waking up to the man that claimed to love me raping what he believed to be my unconscious body,” she said in her testimony. “And the worst part: Sick rituals of binding me up by my hands and feet to be mentally and physically tortured until my abuser felt I had proven my love for them.”

Three years later, Wood took to Instagram to publicly come forward with abuse allegations against Manson.   

“The name of my abuser is Brian Warner, also known to the world as Marilyn Manson,” Wood wrote in her post. “He started grooming me when I was a teenager and horrifically abused me for years. I was brainwashed and manipulated into submission. I am done living in fear of retaliation, slander, or blackmail. I am here to expose this dangerous man and call out the many industries that have enabled him, before he ruins any more lives. I stand with the many victims who will no longer be silent.”

The first part of “Phoenix Rising” focuses on Wood’s family life and her relationship with Manson. The two-part documentary is slated to air in its entirety later this year on HBO, according to Rolling Stone.

More stories you might like:

Why our emotions are so powerful

In the fall of 1983, Soviet lieutenant colonel Stanislav Petrov was monitoring his country’s nuclear warning systems when alarm bells suddenly started ringing. The screen in front of him flashed the word “LAUNCH.” The alerts signaled what appeared to be a terrifying reality: The United States had lobbed five intercontinental missiles straight at the USSR.

Petrov knew what he was supposed to do next: pick up his phone and report the launch to the Soviet high command. Yet he hesitated as fear gripped him. He knew his report would mean the start of a nuclear World War III. Everything in him protested against such a possibility, and his fear mixed with an inchoate suspicion that the alerts might be wrong. So he waited, seconds ticking torturously away, until confirmation came that no missiles had been launched. Sunlight reflections, it turned out, had confused Soviet monitoring satellites and triggered the alert system. Petrov’s emotion-driven response had steered two world powers clear of mutually assured destruction.

In “Emotional: How Feelings Shape Our Thinking,” physicist and science writer Leonard Mlodinow explores our feelings’ power to spur this kind of intelligent, nuanced action, even if the world’s fate doesn’t hang in the balance. Whether positive or negative, our emotions linger like perfume clouds, profoundly affecting how we think — and, by extension, what we do. “[E]motion shapes virtually every thought we have,” Mlodinow writes. “It contributes, moment to moment, to all our judgments and decisions…”

Like Plato, who perceived emotion as a horse and reason as its driver, Western thinkers have long distinguished rational thoughts from non-rational ones. But Mlodinow rejects this traditional divide. Since emotion determines the ever-changing context in which our brains operate, he notes, reason and emotion have always been as interwoven as loom threads. “Even when you believe you are exercising cold, logical reason,” he writes, citing brain researcher Ralph Adolphs, “you aren’t.”

But much of the time, Mlodinow argues, that’s a good thing. Emotion, as Charles Darwin came to believe, often supplies an evolutionary advantage. It can help us solve problems more quickly and incisively than we could with reason alone. The smell rising from a jug of spoiled milk triggers the emotion of disgust, setting the stage for your decision about what to do next (dump it straight down the drain, most likely).

Likewise, it was Stanislav Petrov’s understandable fear of starting World War III that stopped him from reporting the apparent U.S. missile launch. Had he been able to excise his emotions from the equation, he would have passed the alert to his commanders immediately, as his training had primed him to do. A judicious blend of emotion and rationality, Mlodinow writes, “provides the more efficient route to achieving a workable answer.”

From this launching point, Mlodinow sends readers on an all-inclusive tour of the emotional landscape, describing the key roles feelings like love, determination, fear, and sadness play in our lives — both for good and ill. Along the way, must-see tour stops are interspersed with the odd clunker. Some of Mlodinow’s conclusions feel like old news: Most of us have heard the theory that sadness compels us to “do the difficult mental work of rethinking beliefs and reprioritizing goals,” something post-traumatic growth researchers have been contending for years.

Other insights are more philosophically interesting, like Mlodinow’s reflections on research showing that it’s possible — at least in animals — to enhance determination by sending laser light into certain brain regions. “By stimulating the right handful of neurons, we really can increase resilience,” he writes. Findings like this could potentially upend the moral value we accord some emotional states. We’ve long viewed determination as a litmus test for character, but if scientists can evoke something like grit with the flip of a switch, is that litmus test still valid?

Throughout, Mlodinow’s jocular storytelling style helps smooth some of his tour’s conceptual bumps. Describing a lovesick man’s plan to have a friend shoot him so that his ex would feel sorry for him, he observes that the man’s ex “didn’t seem to care.”

“Apparently,” he writes, “she didn’t feel that the bullet hole in Cardella had remedied the shortcomings of their relationship.”

The final chapters of “Emotional” deliver the biggest payoff, exploring research-tested ways to regulate emotion to produce better outcomes and softer landings. Compared to instinct, Mlodinow points out, emotion leaves far more room for personal agency — for crafting a tailored, deliberate response that aligns with your goals and well-being.

If, say, you’re stressed about being 10 minutes late to a meeting, you can tell yourself, “This won’t bother anyone because they know I am usually on time,” a reappraisal that will dampen the fear and guilt you might otherwise suffer. And if a friend ghosts you, you could consider other life commitments that might prevent them from getting in touch, which might help you feel sympathy rather than resentment. “If there are different ways of looking at something, which lead to different emotions,” Mlodinow writes, “why not train yourself to think in the way that leads to the emotion you want?”

If this sounds like a riff on the cognitive-behavioral approach of changing destructive thoughts to combat depression, that’s because in some ways it is. Yet Mlodinow’s prescription still feels fresh because it’s aimed not just at easing mental health struggles, but at helping more-or-less healthy people to flourish in new ways.

Since thought and emotion are so intertwined, harnessing reason to govern emotion might seem like a losing proposition. Still, research bears out the mental and physical rewards of taking new perspectives on your feelings — or at least attempting to — when they threaten to steer you off course.

The better people can modulate their emotions, studies show, the less prone they are to heart attacks — possibly because re-directing tempestuous feelings can calm the body’s stress response, limiting the tissue damage that often comes with it. “Once you are self-aware,” Mlodinow writes, “you can manage your feelings so that they always work in your favor.”

An absolutist claim, perhaps, but Mlodinow makes a strong case that this kind of emotional reframing is at least worth a try.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

The astoundingly low COVID-19 infection rate in sub-Saharan Africa may be a mirage

On November 11, 2021, four international travelers in Botswana tested positive for COVID-19, nearly four days after they entered the country. Per protocol, the virus samples were genetically sequenced, which is when scientists discovered a variant they had never seen before — what we now know as omicron.

Around the same time in November, in the South African province of Gauteng — where Johannesburg is located — fewer than 1 percent of the population was testing positive for COVID-19. A couple weeks later, COVID-19 cases skyrocketed. Scientists subsequently sequenced a few positive cases and found that omicron became the dominant strain in Gauteng in less than two weeks, not long after the region had been devastated by the delta variant. Omicron has now rapidly spread across the world, and is the cause behind an increase in surges, lockdowns and hospitalizations. According to data analyzed by the New York Times, the United States, France, India, Italy, Brazil, Spain, Argentina, Germany and the United Kingdom are the countries currently experiencing the highest number of daily average cases thanks to Omicron.

In South Africa, as Salon previously reported, COVID-19 case numbers in South Africa fell fast nearly a month after they spiked. But omicron, according to data maps, didn’t appear to spread across other parts of Africa, like in sub-Saharan Africa. In December, Uganda confirmed its first omicron case—yet with only 4.1 percent of the country vaccinated, according to data the country is averaging 302 cases a day. Similarly low spread appears to be happening in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi, too, all countries that have very low vaccination rates. Did sub-Saharan African countries dodge omicron? And if so, how? 

Related: In South Africa, COVID cases fall as fast as they rose — suggesting the omicron wave could be brief

Since the pandemic’s inception, the infection pattern across the continent has not followed the same pattern as elsewhere in the world. Back in August 2020, less than a year into the global pandemic, scientists were struggling to figure out why cases and mortality was so low in sub-Saharan Africa. One theory turned on the relative youthfulness of the population in many countries, noting that age is inversely correlated with COVID-19 mortality rate. Another theory posited in Science magazine was that the African population in general had previous exposure to related coronaviruses, which had primed the population’s immune system against SARS-CoV-2. 

Almost a year and a half later, however, cases in sub-Saharan Africa continue to be low compared to the rest of the world (although Nigeria is a slight outlier among those countries). Yet now, scientists are less convinced that the reason relates to any innate immunity or demographic situation, and perhaps more due to the lack of testing — meaning case counts are actually high, they’re just not tested. 

In other words, the appearance of low COVID cases in sub-Saharan Africa may merely be a mirage. 

“Testing is a lot less and, because [omicron] is a milder variant people are having milder-like symptoms and then they don’t test,” said Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease doctor and professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. “What’s usually alerting people in low-income countries to something really bad happening with a surge was hospitalizations — for example in India, it wasn’t just that they were idling testing in the beginning of March, they basically started seeing people coming into the hospital, and then they ramped up their testing.”

Gandhi said cases, in general, aren’t a good metric to understand what’s happening in sub-Saharan Africa.

“In sub-Saharan Africa, if you don’t see your hospitalizations going up, you’re not going to just test within a low income setting,” Gandhi said, adding that the reason could be funding. “What I think is happening in sub-Saharan Africa is that they are going through omicron, but it’s more mild, maybe they have enough population immunity around and they’re not testing as much.”

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

Indeed, as Nature reported in March 2021, it is difficult to capture the situation in sub-Saharan Africa— in part because of the cost of testing. In general, testing levels have been generally lower in sub-Saharan Africa.

“The cost for COVID-19 testing might seem minimal to middle- and high-income countries, but poorer countries cannot afford to test large numbers of people,” Villyen Motaze at Stellenbosch University in Cape Town, South Africa, told Nature.

Motaze and colleagues published a study showing that climate factors, like temperature and humidity, have very little effects on epidemic peaks — defying any theories that the climate has anything to do with the appearance of few cases in sub-Sahara Africa.

“This idea should be dropped,” said Fidisoa Rasambainarivo, another one of the paper’s authors. “Modelling work clearly indicates that climate does not constitute the protective factor we were hoping for.”

Scientists called for vaccine equity, and access to care.

“Following the many variations in risk factors revealed in our article, vaccination coverage and protection will likely be heterogeneous within and between countries,” Rasambainarivo said. “Scientists need to work with authorities to minimize those differences, because they will have consequences for the pandemic globally.”

Read more on the omicron variant:

Liz Cheney fires back at Newt Gingrich after he suggests throwing Jan. 6 committee in jail

Republicans on the House committee investigating the deadly January 6 Capitol riot hit back at former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., for suggesting that members of the panel may be jailed if Democrats lose the House in the midterms.

Gingrich, who was speaker from 1995 to 1999 and is now advising Republican leadership on midterm campaign strategy, said in an interview with Fox News Sunday that Republicans would seek to take revenge on “mean” and “nasty” members of the committee investigating the Capitol attack.

“You’re going to have a Republican majority in the House and a Republican majority in the Senate. And all of these people who have been so tough and so mean and so nasty are going to be delivered subpoenas,” Gingrich predicted, accusing the panel of “running over the law” and “pursuing innocent people” with document requests. “It’s basically a lynch mob,” he said.

“I think when you have a Republican Congress, this is all going to come crashing down,” he added. “And the wolves are going to find out they are now sheep and they’re the ones who are going to face a real risk of, I think, jail for the kind of laws they’re breaking.”

RELATED: Ted Cruz says GOP will impeach Biden if it retakes Congress — whether it’s “justified or not”

The comments came days after the Washington Post reported that Gingrich is advising House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy on Republican plans for the midterms and the next congressional term, when the GOP is widely expected to win back control of the House. Reps. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Dan Bishop, R-N.C., among others have also floated Republican revenge fantasies targeting the Biden administration after the Jan. 6 committee issued contempt referrals to the Justice Department against former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows and ex-Trump strategist Steve Bannon. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, even suggested that a Republican House majority might move to impeach President Joe Biden whether it’s “justified or not.” (There is effectively no possibility that such an impeachment would result in conviction in the Senate: No matter how many seats Republicans win this year, they’ll be well short of the required 67.)

John Gibbs, a Trump-endorsed Republican House candidate in Michigan, endorsed Gingrich’s comments on Sunday as “correct.”

“That’s why if I’m elected … I’ll make sure those who abused their office to target political opponents via the J6 committee are held accountable,” he tweeted.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., the vice-chair of the Jan. 6 committee, called out Gingrich’s remarks on Twitter.

“A former Speaker of the House is threatening jail time for members of Congress who are investigating the violent January 6 attack on our Capitol and our Constitution,” she wrote. “This is what it looks like when the rule of law unravels.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., responded to the comments by tweeting a GIF of Chris Farley’s school bus driver character from the film “Billy Madison.”

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., one of the Democrats on the committee, called Gingrich’s remarks “bizarre.”

“I think Newt has really lost it,” she told CNN. “You know, it leaves me speechless. I mean, unless he is assuming that the government does get overthrown and there’s no system of justice.”

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., linked Gingrich’s rhetoric to that of far-right Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who has repeatedly floated civil war fantasies.

“Not all Republicans think things like this, but many do,” he said of Gingrich’s remarks. “And if the Gingrich/Taylor Greene wing of the party takes over (if they already haven’t), then your democracy might be gone.”

Read more:

Insurrection by other means: The far right is using anti-vax sentiment to radicalize Republicans

The “Defeat the Mandates” rally on Sunday in Washington D.C. was not exactly the blockbuster event, size-wise, organizers had hoped to turn out. The event’s planners had predicted 20,000 people, but more reasonable estimates suggested it was fewer than half that who actually showed. But despite the paltry turnout, the event was deeply troubling to experts who monitor the far-right.

The tone and tenor of the occasion were so hyperbolic and self-aggrandizing, creating exactly the sort of conditions that will further radicalize ordinary Republicans and stoke more right-wing violence. Disgustingly, one of the main speakers was Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the son of the Democratic scion who was assassinated in 1968. Kennedy has spent the past few years becoming an increasingly unhinged anti-vaccine activist — but his presence on Sunday was even more alarming considering the role that the Kennedy family plays in the imaginations of the QAnon cult.

RELATED: Insurrection by other means: Republicans are ready to die of COVID to spite Biden, Democrats

Many QAnoners believe that JFK and JFK Jr. — Kennedy’s deceased uncle and first cousin, respectively — are still alive and secretly supporting Donald Trump. Simply by showing up, Kennedy validated these kinds of fringe beliefs. The situation got much worse when he actually spoke and told the crowd that anti-vaxxers have it worse than Jews did during the Holocaust. 

“Even in Hitler Germany (sic), you could, you could cross the Alps into Switzerland. You could hide in an attic, like Anne Frank did,” Kennedy said. “I visited, in 1962, East Germany with my father and met people who had climbed the wall and escaped, so it was possible. Many died, true, but it was possible.” 

Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.

Kennedy’s analogy is incoherent for obvious reasons — does he think East Germany was a Nazi state or not know that Frank died at the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp? — and was widely criticized for being offensive. The Auschwitz Memorial responded with a tweet describing Kennedy’s speech as “a sad symptom of moral & intellectual decay.”

But the speech wasn’t just offensive — it’s also dangerous.

It doesn’t matter that Kennedy didn’t come right out and call on people to commit violence. It’s inciting to tell anti-vaxxers they are victims of oppression worse than what the Jews faced under the Nazis. It justifies violence as a form of self-defense. This is why experts on far-right organizing and violence were alarmed. Ben Collins, an NBC reporter who has been covering the rise of American fascism, was especially concerned. 

Kennedy was just one of many who made the comparison Sunday, both onstage and in the crowd. There was also a lot of comparing the plight of anti-vaxxers to that of Black Americans living under segregation. Meanwhile, rally organizers pretended theirs was a message of diversity and tolerance. Prominent anti-vaccine activist and rally speaker Del Bigtree insisted this “is a movement of unity,” and “if you have any problems with race, or religion, or sexual preference then I don’t think you’re truly representing this movement.”

In reality, however, as Will Carless of USA Today wrote, hate groups and far-right activists are using the anti-vaccine movement to recruit, both online and off. Brian Hughes of the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab at American University explained to Carless that the far-right sees “anti-vaccine sentiment and COVID denialism as a market that they can exploit for views, for clicks and for merchandise sales.” Indeed, these kinds of groups were heavily represented in the crowd at the rally. As Salon alum and current Daily Beast reporter Zachary Petrizzo noted, “Far-right fanatics were out in full force, from the extremist members of the hate group Proud Boy to rank-and-file supporters who consume everything that conspiracy theorist Alex Jones utters.”

Want more Amanda Marcotte on politics? Subscribe to her newsletter Standing Room Only.

But it was also true that more ordinary Republicans also showed up. There were even people claiming to be disillusioned Democrats, although this is a common enough lie on the right and should always be taken with a grain of salt. Either way, what is crucial to understand is that the far-right and hate groups are plugging into the anti-vaccine discourse to lure conservatives into becoming even more fascistic and more supportive of the violent rejection of democracy. (Similarly, fascists have also been using anti-abortion demonstrations to recruit.)

For the past year, being anti-vaccine has been an easy — if often deadly — way for ordinary Republicans to express their hatred of President Joe Biden and to spite Democrats. Fox News and GOP leaders have encouraged their followers to reject the vaccine as a way to show solidarity on the right and make life harder for those who voted against Trump. It’s ugly and dangerous behavior — but it has been effective at meeting the liberal-triggering goals.

RELATED: With new subpoenas, Jan. 6 committee closes in on its ultimate target: Donald Trump

Biden’s approval ratings have been dropping as a result of the prolonged pandemic. Democratic voters, who are more likely to make personal sacrifices like mask-wearing or social distancing to curb the pandemic, have been made to suffer the indignities stemming from a prolonged pandemic, even if their vaccinated status has largely prevented them from being the ones filling up hospitals. Republicans are three times as likely to be unvaccinated as Democrats. That’s why anti-vaccine ideology makes a perfect recruiting ground for fascists.

There are a lot of Republican voters whose hatred and desire to spite Democrats has led them to gamble with their own lives by refusing vaccines. It’s not much of a leap to believe such folks are open to taking things to the next level, to reject democracy and embrace an authoritarian ideology for the same vindictive reasons. The anti-vaccine discourse is a perfect space to blur the lines between being a petty partisan who is mad about losing an election and being an outright fascist who no longer believes in holding free and fair elections. 

Proud Boys return to D.C. — this time for massive anti-vaccine rally

For a second cold January day in as many years, thousands of demonstrators, including throngs of far-right Proud Boys, descended upon Washington, D.C. This time, the right-wing marchers came to protest vaccine mandates, even as America struggles to ward off the third wave of COVID-19.

While the omicron variant continues to rage, about 25,000 protesters gathered Sunday on the National Mall, chanting anti-vaccine slogans, donning pro-Trump memorabilia, and holding up signs that called for violence, according to The Washington Post. Many of their signs displayed messages like “Vaccines are mass kill bio weapons” and “Trump won,” echoing Donald Trump’s baseless claim of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. Nearby, a bus – plastered with pictures Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky, White House chief medical adviser Anthony Fauci and Microsoft founder Bill Gates – was parked on the side of the road, with the word “WANTED” above the three figures’ heads. 

RELATED: Instead of just getting vaccinated, anti-vaxxers are drinking iodine antiseptic

Other demonstrators compared vaccine mandates to Nazi Germany, an increasingly popular trend among conservatives, holding up signs with messages like “I am not a lab rat” and “Stop the vaccine Holocaust.”

During a speech held at the rally, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a veteran anti-vaxxer, claimed that vaccine mandates are worse than the policies of Nazi Germany, saying: “Even in Hitler’s Germany, you could hide in the attic like Anne Frank did.”

Other speakers included physician Robert Malone, a prominent purveyor of vaccine misinformation; TV producer Del Bigtree, the CEO of the anti-vaccination group Informed Consent Action Network; and members of public employee associations like Medical Freedom and the D.C. Firefighters Bodily Autonomy Affirmation Group.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Matt Tune, a 48-year-old organizer of the rally, told the Post that he wanted to “change the current narrative…which is basically saying that we’re a bunch of weirdos and freaks who don’t care about humanity. And that’s not true at all.” 

“The goal is to show a unified front of bringing people together — vaccinated, unvaccinated, Democrats, Republicans, all together in solidarity,” Tune added. 

RELATED: How one discredited 1998 study paved the way for today’s anti-vaxxers

The rally also saw attendance from members of the Proud Boys, a far-right neo-fascist group known for promoting and engaging in violence. Members of the group briefly engaged in a verbal back-and-forth with counter-protesters near the Reflecting Pool, though police reported no arrests or incidents of violence throughout the course of the event. 

RELATED: Proud Boys sued by historic Black church after leader admits to burning BLM sign during D.C. rally

The rally comes amid the nation’s ongoing battle to contain COVID-19. According to The New York Times, approximately 63% of Americans are fully vaccinated – a number that continues to climb slowly despite the rapid onset of the omicron variant in early December. Meanwhile, roughly one in five Americans are completely unvaccinated. Experts have repeatedly advised Americans to get vaccinated not only to protect themselves but to lessen the risk of mutation.

Have butter, noodles and onions? Make this simple weeknight meal

Big Little Recipe has the smallest-possible ingredient list and big everything else: flavor, creativity, wow factor. That means five ingredients or fewer — not including water, salt, black pepper, and certain fats (like oil and butter), since we’re guessing you have those covered. Inspired by the column, the Big Little Recipes cookbook is available now. Like, right now.

* * *

An onion knows when it’s in danger. That’s why when you cut it with a knife, or blitz it with a food processor, or pulverize it with a grater, it fights back. It wields sulfur, absorbed from the soil, as a weapon, as its own knife or food processor or grater, sharp enough to make you weep.

A skillet and stove change all this. “The various sulfur compounds react with each other and with our substances to produce a range of characteristic flavor molecules,” explains Harold McGee in “On Food and Cooking.” With fat, heat, and patience, the sharpness in onions softens into something as sweet as candy.

But who said sharpness was a bad thing? An insult is only an insult if you interpret it as an insult.

One of our community’s most beloved recipes is James Beard’s Braised Onion Sauce, which starts with a pound and a half of onions and almost a stick and a half of butter. You cook the onions for an entire hour, until they become unrecognizable, closer to jam than anything else.

Unsurprisingly, another one of Beard’s most iconic recipes also revolves around onions. But in this case, they aren’t cooked for an hour. They aren’t cooked at all. In the dish, which he swiped from his business partners Irma Rhode and Bill Rhode, they’re sliced into slivers and turned into tea sandwiches.

Especially with onions, cooked and raw are opposites that couldn’t be farther apart — or closer together. Like Lindsay Lohan in “The Parent Trap” or Vanessa Hudgens in “The Princess Switch.” If you look closely, it’s just the same actor in a different outfit with different makeup and a different accent.

Of course, that is what makes it so impressive.

These buttery noodles take a similar approach. You sauté an armload of onions until they relent into savory, soothing mush. Then, just before you sit down at the end of a long day, as you are tossing pasta with butter and more butter, you add a couple spoonfuls of minced raw onion, brash and reviving, like a splash of vinegar.

It is not one or the other. It is both. And isn’t this what all of us want? For someone to see us — really see us — for all our prettiness and ugliness and want to stick around anyway? To think our glossy, sautéed sweetness is beautiful. And that our stinging, rude sharpness is beautiful.

Albeit swift enough for a weeknight, this dish showcases the full personality of the onion. The one that only people who really love it get to see.

***

Recipe: Onion-Buttered Noodles

Yields
2-4 servings
Prep Time
15 minutes
Cook Time
35 minutes

Ingredients

  • 1 3/4 pounds yellow onions
  • 6 tablespoons salted butter, at room temperature, divided
  • Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper
  • 8 ounces long pasta, such as fettuccine or pappardelle
  • 1 to 2 garnishes (optional)

 

Directions

  1. Halve, peel, and thinly slice the onions. Mince just enough sliced onion to yield 2 tablespoons, then set that aside. 
  2. Add 2 tablespoons of butter to a large skillet over medium heat. Once melted, add the sliced onions. Generously season with salt and pepper. Cook until golden and jammy, 25 to 35 minutes, stirring often and lowering the heat as needed to avoid scorching; you can add a splash of water every so often if needed to deglaze if the onions threaten to burn. When they’re done, drop the heat to as low as possible to keep warm. 
  3. Meanwhile, fill a large pot with water and set over high heat to come to a boil. When the water is boiling, generously season with salt, then add the pasta. Cook according to the package instructions until al dente. 
  4. With the skillet still over low heat, use tongs or a slotted spoon to transfer the pasta to the skillet with the onions (and don’t drain that water). Add the minced onion, remaining 4 tablespoons of butter, and ¼ cup of pasta water, then toss everything together. Add more pasta water if needed to reach a sauce consistency you love, keeping in mind that it’ll thicken as it sits. Toss in or sprinkle with a bonus or two, if you’d like.

Trumpworld’s delusions and the real world threat

There have been so many unprecedented and weird goings-on in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election that I think everyone’s overwhelmed, so we sometimes miss the forest for the trees. The whole Kraken sideshow between Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, with the rivulets of black dye and shrill accusations that the long-dead former president of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, had rigged the election, was so comically outlandish that I don’t think we fully understood the full scope of the danger the country was in during that period. For all of the public clownish antics by Giuliani and company, the plotting that was going on behind closed doors was even worse.

We now know about the attempt to fire then-acting attorney general and replace him with a Trump toady who was willing to strong-arm state legislators into delaying the certification of votes, a plan which was met with such resistance from both the Department of Justice and the White House Counsel’s office that several staffers threatened to quit en masse, calling it a “murder-suicide pact.” We also now know that the military was so concerned about the president’s erratic behavior that Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley gathered the top brass to remind them of the protocols in place in the event of an order for a nuclear strike and he felt compelled to call his Chinese counterpart to reassure him that the U.S. was not contemplating an attack.

RELATED: Trump, the Proud Boys and the Kraken: Is the #EndofDemocracy just a meme — or the real thing?

We now know all about John Eastman’s coup plot for GOP members of Congress to object to the certification of the electoral votes and have vice president Mike Pence throw the electoral count to the House of Representatives, where Trump would automatically win because the GOP has more state delegations (which, for some reason, made sense to someone at one time.) And we have recently had confirmation that Trump associates, led by Giuliani, coerced local Republicans in swing states to fraudulently sign electoral college ballots as fake Trump electors and send them in as if they were legitimate.

But of all the wild reports that emerged over the past few months about the ongoing insanity in the White House during Trump’s lame duck period, there was always one story that I found so incredible that I wondered if it might not have been exaggerated.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Back in December of 2020, the New York Times reported that a late-night meeting took place in the Oval Office in which the president proposed that Sidney Powell be made a Special Counsel and be given security clearance to pursue her inane claims of massive election rigging. Even Giuliani opposed that idea, but the meeting concluded without anyone knowing if Trump would follow through or not. Retired General Michael Flynn was also present, as was, for some unknown reason, Patrick Byrne, the former CEO of Overstock.com. Jonathan Swan at Axios later reported that these people had actually somehow snuck into the White House (which I didn’t think was possible) to convince the president to “invoke emergency national security powers, seize voting machines and disable the primary levers of American democracy.”

This Oval Office meeting went on for many hours with people coming and going throughout, arguing and yelling back and forth, as the president pressed for these conspiracy theorists to be given more power while his staffers pushed back. It eventually ended up in Trump’s residence with arguments continuing back and forth and no resolution at midnight.

Powell, for her part, insisted that the real story was that the election had been stolen by Venezuela, Iran, China and others, in cahoots with the voting machine manufacturers — all of which was a total fantasy. Flynn was pushing for the military to seize the voting machines. Byrne was babbling that he knew how these things worked because he’d bribed Hillary Clinton with 18 million dollars in an FBI sting which nobody understood. It was, in other words, completely unhinged nonsense.

RELATED: How do we report on Trump’s dastardly schemes without amplifying his lies and incitement?

According to Swan, Powell kept referring to an Executive Order from 2018 which was written to impose sanctions on foreign interference, as if it gave Trump some sort of authority. But the New York Times had earlier reported that there was another Executive Order they were bandying about, which has remained vague until now, but which we knew was supposed to authorize the seizure of the voting machines. Last Friday, Politico reported that it had a copy of that proposed Executive Order. Nobody knows who wrote it, but it’s a good bet that Michael Flynn and Sidney Powell herself had a hand in it. The document would have authorized the Special Counsel to investigate the 2020 election. Flynn had been the first to float the idea of having the military seize the voting machines a few days earlier, and that too appeared in this draft Executive Order. Curiously, however, the order mentions a couple of classified orders, one of which had never been made public and therefore must have come from someone with a security clearance.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

This document is now in the hands of the January 6th committee, which is no doubt trying to run down who wrote the draft. Subpoenas have gone out to Powell and Giuliani although I doubt anyone expects them to comply. Dominion Voting Systems has sued Powell and a number of media companies for defamation for spreading these lies and there’s a good chance that they will lose since her claims were total fabrications.

But after reviewing the reports of this strange meeting in which three crackpots found their way into the White House and commanded nearly six hours of the president and his staff’s time in the middle of the worst public health crisis in a hundred years, I couldn’t help but reflect on the fact that today the vast majority of Republicans are convinced that the election was stolen and the party has done nothing to disabuse them of that fact. And the same delusional former president who took those ridiculous proposals to defy the peaceful transfer of power and fraudulently overturn the election seriously is the front runner for the Republican nomination in 2024. How is it even possible that such a person could be let anywhere near the White House again?   

How to make coffee every which way — from classic drip to pour over

I started drafting this guide to making coffee while lying in bed early one morning. I hadn’t had any coffee yet, and I looked across the room wistfully at my coffee machine. (I live in a studio apartment, so yes, my coffee maker and bed are technically in the same room.) I wondered how I could get it to brew itself so that I didn’t have to get up. This article, unfortunately, will not tell you how to do that. But it will tell you how to brew every type of coffee, from dependable drip to fancy French presses and everything in between.

I’m not by any means a coffee snob. I wish I could get myself to slowly pour hot water from a gooseneck kettle over coffee grounds, slowly extracting their flavor, letting the subtle notes of orange and marzipan energize me. I wish I could detect dulce le leche and green apple and tobacco in my specialty beans. I wish I could become a coffee sommelier, able to tell the difference between Italian and Ecuadoran beans. But I’m not that person.

I was raised on the biggest tub of coffee grounds that my dad could find at the best price, brewed in a Mr. Coffee 12-Cup drip machine. My sister and I would encourage him to branch out and try something new (our gentle way of saying better beans). “I don’t drink it for the taste,” he would tell us, and we’d concur. We, too, drank it first and foremost as a way to simply wake up. We would give him single-origin beans from local roasters for Father’s Day and Christmas and he’d appreciate them, and then, as soon as the bag was empty, he would pick up a tub of Folgers or Maxwell House. “Look at this: 30 ounces for seven bucks,” he said. We’d roll our eyes and laugh but then happily drink it the following morning because we were half-asleep and he was right — we weren’t reallydrinking it for the taste.

Aside from teaching me the basic steps of brewing coffee at home, my dad did share a valuable lesson on how to efficiently make drip coffee: Always prep it the night before. This means grinding the coffee beans (if they’re not already ground in a red plastic bucket), measuring out the desired amount, and adding them to the filter basket. Add the water, too, so that all you need to do before the sun rises is “just press play.” Would a fancy coffee person do this? No. But for me this is the only way to successfully brew coffee without having had any coffee.

Grinding the beans

Let’s get one thing straight: The best-tasting coffee is not just about the quality of the beans, but also how recently they were ground. If you want to really appreciate the depth of flavor in your beans, grind them just before brewing. I realize that this negates my previous suggestion about grinding your beans the night before, but this is me trying to teach you the best way, not the most efficient way.

You’ll find that there are two different types of coffee grinders on the market: blade grinders (which are your typical $10 grocery store grinders) and burr grinders. Burr grinders are often seen as the premium, fancier, all-around better grinder — but why? “Burr grinders crush the roasted coffee beans more evenly and ensure a uniform grind overall. On the other hand, conventional blade grinders essentially chop up the coffee beans, which results in an inconsistent grind, ultimately diminishing the taste and finish of your coffee,” says Cary Wong, coffee educator for Partners Coffee. Burr grinders are significantly more expensive and much larger (you’ll be hard pressed to find one that’s under $60 and under 15 inches), but the payoff is worth it if you really care about good-tasting coffee.

As for grind sizes, we’ll get into the ideal coarseness for each method ahead. But as a rule of thumb: “The shorter the contact time with water, the finer the grounds should be. For longer contact time with water, you’ll want coarser grounds,” explains Wong. Think of espresso: A single or double shot of espresso brews in less than 15 seconds, so you want very fine grounds. Grounds for drip or French press coffee come in contact with the hot water for about 5 minutes, so medium-coarse grounds are best; the most time-consuming methods like cold-brew coffee require very coarse grounds because they spend the most amount of time swimming in the water.

A note about brew methods

These directions will guide you through how to make different types of coffee. With each brewing method, I will share expert-provided recommendations for the grind size, water temperature, and ratio of water to grounds. The real way to become a coffee expert is to find what you prefer after months of diligent testing. You’ll spend hundreds of dollars on coffee beans from all over the globe and will swear off human connection in the name of true love, which will come in the form of an Escali kitchen scale (kidding).

But the truth is, these are just recommendations. If you find that you prefer to use 190℉ water instead of 175℉ to make AeroPress coffee, bravo! If you decide that cold brew coffee is too expensive and there’s nothing wrong with an old batch of refrigerated drip coffee, kudos! I know that good coffee is about the best beans and the best equipment. But I also know that I need it to help me put my socks on and find the remote control and not forget I have a 9 a.m. dentist appointment, so therefore, it doesn’t really matter what machine I use. Find what method works for you and tweak it from there.

AeroPress

What is it?

An AeroPress is a small handheld device that produces espresso-like coffee. While it doesn’t technically make espresso, it does produce a small amount of very strong coffee, which most people would think of as espresso. And I say that as a nonthreatening warning: Don’t expect your AeroPress to make just a regular cup of good coffee. It is stronger than usual. You’ll need to dilute it for a cup of drip coffee substitute. Despite the fact that AeroPress produces espresso-like coffee, you can use any type of coffee beans you like.

How to make it

AeroPress, which is the name of the coffee maker, recommends using fine-ground or espresso-ground beans. Place one rounded scoop of fine-ground coffee (equivalent to about 3 tablespoons or 14 grams) in the chamber. Give the AeroPress a little shimmy-shake to make sure that the grounds are level. Slowly pour hot water over the coffee grounds; the brand recommends using 175℉ hot water for dark-roast coffee and 185℉ water for medium-roast coffee. Stir the water and grounds together for 10 seconds. Next, insert the plunger and gently press down to extract the coffee. Once you feel some resistance, that’s a sign that you’ve extracted as much coffee as you can. Drink it espresso-style or add more water to create an Americano.

Why Aeropress?

If you’re picky about your coffee, the AeroPress is a convenient brew method that delivers exceptional tasting-coffee on the go. “It’s great for camping and is easy to clean,” says Wong.

Chemex

What is it?

A Chemex looks like a flower vase with a wood and leather corset wrapped around its waist. So stylish! Chemex doesn’t refer to a style of coffee, but rather a popular style of glass coffee maker used to make pour over coffee.

How to make it

As a general rule, use a brew ratio of one part ground coffee to 17 parts water. So if we’re talking about brewing 2 cups of coffee, you should measure out 30 grams of coffee and 510 grams of hot water. To make coffee in a Chemex, insert the specialty filter in the vessel. Slowly pour a little bit of hot water over the filter to get rid of the papery flavor. Dump the water and then repeat the process, this time with the grounds. Add the grounds to the wet filter and slowly pour the hot water in a clockwise motion over the grounds, allowing them to “bloom.” Stop after the grounds are just barely covered with water. After 1 minute, pour the rest of the water over the grounds. Once you’ve used all of the water, let it brew.

Why Chemex?

If you want to make pour over coffee for a crowd, a Chemex is one of the best vessels to do so. “Chemex or pour over coffee creates more complex flavors than other methods,” says Wong. It comes in a few different sizes (as small as 3 cups and as big as 10 cups). We also love it because it doesn’t take up much space (no more than a flower vase) and costs less than $50.

Cold Brew

What is it?

Cold brew coffee is a style of iced coffee that requires patience and a lot of coffee grounds. Grounds are slowly steeped in cold water for at least 12 — and upwards of 24 — hours to create a concentrate (meaning super-strong iced coffee), which is then diluted with more water or milk.

How to make it

Whether you are using regular coffee grounds or specialty cold brew pouches, the latter of which are pre-measured for your convenience, making cold brew follows the same process. Here’s how we like to make it with grounds: Coarsely grind (and we mean very coarsely grind) 3/4 cup beans for every 4 cups of cold water. Combine the two in a large mason jar or another large, sealable vessel and stir vigorously to ensure that the grounds are moistened. Seal the container with a lid and let it stand at room temperature overnight.

Once it’s fully steeped, line a fine-mesh sieve with cheesecloth and set it over a large pitcher or bowl. Pour the coffee through the sieve, pressing the grounds to extract all of the coffee. Discard or compost the spent grounds. Pour the coffee into a glass, add water and milk to taste, and store the remaining cold brew in the refrigerator for up to 5 days.

Why cold brew?

It’s a better version of iced coffee that removes all of the usual bitterness and acidity that you’d get just from brewing hot drip coffee and then cooling it down. The downside to cold brew coffee is that it can be expensive, since it uses a lot of grounds and yields only a few cups of iced coffee.

Drip Coffee

What is it?

When you typed “how to make coffee” in Google, this is probably what you came here for — good old-fashioned drip coffee using a $15 machine and whatever beans you have on hand, right? And there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, I love that. In my caffeinated research journey, I struggled to find tips for how to make a really good cup of drip coffee. There are how-tos and FAQs for every fancy pour over machine on the market. But drip coffee? Nada. So we’re in this together.

The reason that “coffee people” dislike drip coffee so much is because they believe that the water doesn’t ever get hot enough, thus depriving you of the opportunity to taste the full spectrum of caramelized, woody, floral notes in your beans. And that may be true. It probably is true. But it’s also the most popular and least expensive method for brewing 12 cups of hot coffee in under 10 minutes, which is quite valuable.

How to make it

The educators at Counter Culture Coffee don’t like drip coffee machines. But they also understand that it’s the preferred method for many coffee drinkers. For better or for worse, in sickness and in health, here’s how they recommend making drinkable drip coffee: Start with medium-coarse grounds; on a scale of 1 to 10, your grounds for drip coffee should be around a 6.

As for the ratio of beans to water, they recommend 20 grams of coffee beans per cup of coffee (measure this out before grinding) and 320 grams of cold-filtered water per cup of coffee. If you’re making 4 cups of coffee, you’d need 80 grams of coffee beans and 1,280 grams of cold filtered water. But I’m just going to call it water because if you’re the type of person who is making drip coffee, you probably don’t care to use filtered water (I sure don’t).

From here, you know the drill: Add the beans to the coffee filter, pour the water into the reservoir in the back, plug it in, turn the machine on, and start to tackle your daily to-do list while it’s brewing.

Why drip coffee?

It’s cheap, convenient, crowd-friendly, and allows you to brush your teeth and wash the dishes and vacuum the rug all while it’s brewing. Need I go on?

French Press

What is it?

The French press is considered “a full-immersion brewing method” in which coarse coffee grounds and hot water hang out together in the vessel. This process creates a full-bodied cup of coffee. “People who like their coffee with a little bit more body and coffee oil will enjoy French press,” explains Wong. It’s also ideal for busy folks who don’t have the time to slowly pour hot water over their coffee grounds for 5 minutes; it’s the ultimate “set it and forget it” style of coffee.

How to make it

A French press was the first fancy coffee maker I ever received. I received a copper one as a high school graduation gift from my aunt and uncle, and I felt so cool. But I never really figured out how to make it taste delicious, so here’s me attempting to, for real this time. According to the wide-awake folks at Partners Coffee, the ideal ratio of coffee to water is 1:15. But what does that actually mean? Their French press coffee recipe calls for 34 grams of coarse grounds to 500 grams of 200℉ water, which will make 1 to 2 cups of coffee. Add the coarse-ground coffee to the French press and set a time for 4 minutes. Slowly pour 100 grams of hot water over the coffee and let it begin to bloom for about 45 seconds. Pour the remaining 400 grams of hot water in the press and stir to combine. After 4 minutes, press the coffee.

Why French press?

I like to think of French press coffee as a stepping stone from drip coffee into the world of all these fancier, fussier machines. This is because it requires a little more hands-on time than a traditional drip machine, but not by much. Oh, and most French presses can make up to 4 cups of coffee, depending on the size of your beaker.

Hario V60

What is it?

If you’re someone who is willing to take at least 5 minutes to make a cup of coffee, may I interest you in pour over? This method will create a flavorful, lighter-tasting cup of coffee that has more clarity. If you’re not using a Chemex, then you’re probably using a Hario V60 to make pour over coffee. This simple piece of equipment looks like a cup and saucer that you put on top of your mug and saucer. It’s what you use when you — a person who enjoys the slow, meditative process of making coffee in the wee hours of the morning — want to make a single cup of coffee. It produces a slightly more acidic cup of coffee than other pour over methods like the Chemex or Moccamaster.

How to make it

To make coffee using a Hario V60, start by heating water in a gooseneck-style kettle to between 200℉ and 210℉ (essentially, you want it to be just below boiling). For 1 cup of coffee, you’ll need about 3 tablespoons (or about 20 grams) of ground coffee. Tuck the filter in the pour over and slowly drizzle the hot water over the filter to wet in, which will get rid of any weird papery, dusty flavor. Dump out this batch of water and then recenter the machine. Add your grounds to the wet filter and slowly pour some hot water in a circular motion over the grounds, which will allow them to “bloom.” After 1 minute, pour the rest of the water over the grounds, slowly. Let the water slowly make its way through the grounds, and after about 3 minutes, you should have the perfect pour over coffee.

Why pour over?

You have options! From the single-serve Hario V60 to crowd-friendly makers like the Chemex and Moccamaster, you’re able to achieve a delicious, light-tasting cup of coffee for up to 10 people.

Moccamaster

What is it?

Like the Chemex, the Moccamaster is a specific machine that allows you to make pour over coffee for a crowd. However, unlike most pour over machines, the Moccamaster is entirely hands-off in the same way that a drip coffee maker is — it replicates the style of pour over coffee with just the press of a button. Unlike drip coffee machines, which have one heating element for both the water and the carafe, the Moccamaster has two separate copper heating elements to ensure that the water gets hot enough for brewing without causing the brewed coffee to get so hot that it tastes burnt and bitter.

How to make it

Making coffee in a Moccamaster is most similar to drip coffee; just measure how much water you want, pour it in the reservoir, add your grounds to a coffee-filter-lined basket, and turn on the switch. For 5 cups of water, start with 73 grams of coffee grounds. Brew a batch, see if it tastes strong enough (or maybe it’s too strong!) and adjust the next time around. Within about 5 minutes, your coffee will be brewed and ready to drink (and hey, maybe you even washed some dishes in that time).

Why Moccamaster?

If you can’t do away with the ease (aka laziness) of a drip coffee machine but actually like to appreciate the flavors in a cup of coffee, the Moccamaster offers both. The downside is that their signature 10-cup machine will run you about $350, about the same as a good espresso machine.

This post contains products independently chosen (and loved) by Food52 editors and writers. Food52 earns an affiliate commission on qualifying purchases of the products they link to.

Florida school district cancels real history as anti-CRT censorship spreads

The day after the Florida state Senate’s education committee passed a bill banning public schools and private businesses from making people feel “discomfort” when learning about U.S. racial history, a school district in central Florida canceled a teacher training seminar about the civil rights movement that had been months in the planning. 

This past Saturday, Dr. J. Michael Butler, the Kenan Distinguished Professor of History at Flagler College in St. Augustine, was supposed to lead a day-long seminar for Osceola County elementary school teachers on “The Long Civil Rights Movement.” The event was hosted by the nonprofit National Council for History Education, a leading provider of professional development for history teachers, and was part of a three-year partnership between the council and the district to enrich history education at underserved public schools. (Osceola County, just southeast of Orlando, has a population of close to 400,000, which is nearly two-thirds Black or Latino, and a median household income of $52,000, well below the national median.)

Butler, the author of multiple books about Southern and civil rights history, including most recently “Beyond Integration: The Black Freedom Struggle in Escambia County, Florida, 1960-1980,” planned three presentations, covering historic milestones like the Brown v. Board of Education decision, the March on Washington, the integration of the University of Mississippi, and the Montgomery bus boycott. Seminar attendees would then work with a curriculum specialist to translate that history into grade-appropriate lesson plans and classroom resources. A seminar agenda noted that teachers would receive two children’s books to consider for classroom use: the elementary-targeted “White Socks Only” and, for middle schoolers, “The Watsons Go to Birmingham.” Butler saw the training as part of his career-long mission to teach that “people who are marginalized have a history too, and it’s a very inspiring American story.” 

But last Wednesday afternoon, Butler and his colleagues learned that Osceola school officials were forcing NCHE to cancel the seminar. The district, he was told, had instituted a review committee to investigate all training materials for the possibility that they might promote “critical race theory,” and its curriculum director worried the seminar’s advance reading materials would raise “red flags.” 

RELATED: Evangelicals do battle with “critical race theory” in new online video course

According to NCHE executive director Grace Leatherman, district officials were particularly concerned about the seminar’s use of primary source materials, including decades-old political cartoons about the Great Migration and Plessy v. Ferguson, the Supreme Court decision that established segregation’s “separate but equal” doctrine, as well as images of contemporary civil rights protests like Colin Kaepernick kneeling on a football field. Since the committee wouldn’t have time to review those materials before Saturday, the seminar was canceled and wouldn’t be rescheduled.

To Butler, this was not just the culmination of Florida’s year-long demonization of so-called critical race theory — however vaguely or inaccurately defined — but also the realization of something he warned his students about years ago. “When our former president used the term ‘fake news,’ I told my classes to be aware of what’s coming next, and that’s fake history,” he told me. “If there’s a topic that can be censored today, that means there’s a precedent for the censoring of any topic in any state moving forward. And that should scare all teachers.” 

On Thursday, after Osceola’s participating teachers were sent notice of the seminar’s cancellation, with no explanation, Butler took to Twitter to warn that this is “what the war against CRT in Florida is really about”: not keeping teachers from “going rogue,” or protecting white children from feeling guilty, but “making it difficult — if not impossible — to teach any history that considers the Black experience,” period. 

At the broadest level, the seminar was yet another victim of the nationwide right-wing crusade against CRT. In vying to emerge as the face of that fight, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has launched numerous attacks against CRT, or related targets, over the last half-year. 

These have included policies equating teaching “that racism is embedded in American society and its legal systems” with Holocaust denialism; bans on schools using The New York Times’ “1619 Project” or pedagogical concepts like “culturally responsive instruction”; requirements that civics classes teach “portraits in patriotism“; and two bills currently under consideration to establish an annual “Victims of Communism Day,” mandating that schools observe the anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution to teach about communist dictators, and DeSantis’s “Stop W.O.K.E. Act,” which would empower private citizens to sue school districts they believe are teaching CRT. 

But that fight is also taking place at the local level, including in Osceola County, where the school board’s general counsel, Frank Kruppenbacher, has taken repeated aim at the supposed specter of critical race theory in recent months. In October, Kruppenbacher, who has said that “as an American” he finds CRT “frankly frightening,” investigated parents’ complaints that a district center for new teachers promoted CRT because its website included references to race and “equity.” After sending some 60 pages of documents related to parents’ complaints to the state Department of Education, last Wednesday Kruppenbacher introduced a draft resolution to ban CRT at the district level, explaining, “We want to educate employees that they’ve got to adhere to this, and we’ll be aggressive with dealing with every report we get,” and warning that educators’ teaching certificates were on the line. That was the same day that district officials canceled the NCHE civil rights seminar. 

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

An administrative employee in a different Florida school district, speaking to Salon on condition of anonymity, speculated that Osceola’s district authorities likely saw that the NCHE seminar would cover civil rights protests and “got so nervous that it was easier not to hold it than to not only have external opposition but internal opposition too,” particularly “if your own school board attorney is not going to have your back.” 

Across Florida’s school districts, the employee said, an environment of self-censorship and risk avoidance is becoming commonplace as DeSantis and his education commissioner, Richard Corcoran — who has described the primary purpose of education as instilling moral values — are running a multifaceted approach to overhaul Florida schooling, including by defining the central message of U.S. history and civics as “America was intended as a good place and always will be,” and making educators “very afraid to bring up any topic that makes people feel uncomfortable.” 

The employee noted that their own request for anonymity in speaking to a reporter reflected that environment: “It’s a really strange and hard time. Places like Florida and Virginia are living one reality, and places like New York and California are living a different one completely. The combination of this uber-patriotic Americanism, that’s defined as ‘either you’re with us or against us,’ and the demonization of questioning, are the worst aspects of fear and anti-intellectualism.” 

Butler says he has heard from numerous Florida public school history teachers who say their lessons are being scrutinized to see whether they run afoul of the DeSantis administration’s new laws and policies. One teacher, Butler relayed, ordered photocopies of a handout for a lesson about the infamous Birmingham church bombing of 1963, only to have her request trigger a phone call from district authorities to her principal, asking what was going on. 

In Dunedin High School in central Florida’s Pinellas County, history teacher Brandt Robinson has been the target of one parent’s attacks for months. First, a student’s mother accused him at a July school board meeting of promoting “Marxist indoctrination of our youth,” because he’d urged his school board to stand firm against the growing attacks on CRT. Then, after her son briefly enrolled in, and then dropped, Robinson’s elective African American history class last August, the mother lodged multiple formal complaints about his curriculum. Specifically, she charged that Robinson’s use of historian Nell Irvin Painter’s 2006 book “Creating Black Americans: African-American History and Its Meanings, 1619 to the Present” must mean that Robinson was violating Florida’s new ban on teaching materials from the “1619 Project” — even though Painter’s book was published 13 years before the Times series. 

“What’s happening is these groups are conflating CRT with all these other initiatives,” as well as basic, factual history, said Robinson. “Then that intimidates school boards. And, to the degree that these boards are politically vulnerable, some are caving.” 

That pattern is repeating around the country. A report released last Wednesday by UCLA’s Institute for Democracy, Education and Access, studied the local impact of anti-CRT fights, and found that almost 900 U.S. public school districts, representing around 18 million K-12 students, or 35% of the U.S. student body, have been affected by local anti-CRT campaigns. Interestingly, the study notes that — as with the recent finding that participants in the Jan. 6 insurrection were often motivated by changing racial demographics around them — school districts where the percentage of white students has declined sharply in recent years were three times more likely to experience local conflicts over CRT. But across the board, what the study calls anti-CRT “conflict campaigns” have left educators “terrified” to do their work, often without the support of school or district authorities, and sometimes afraid to introduce subjects that might spark anger from parents, politicians or advocacy groups. 

While Robinson’s school stuck by him — a committee formed to review his curriculum unanimously dismissed the complaining mother’s appeal — he said many of his colleagues fear being similarly targeted for a book they’ve assigned or a discussion they led. On top of the incredible stresses of teaching through the pandemic, he said charges that teachers are trying to “indoctrinate” their students or “teach them to hate our country” have left him, and many other teachers, feeling that they could “break down almost at any moment.” 

The Osceola School District didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment, but in an email to seminar participants obtained by Salon, district superintendent Debra Pace explained that “the district team received the prereading document on Wednesday and felt like we needed an opportunity to review them prior to the training in light of the current conversations across our state and in our community about critical race theory.” While the superintendent said she remained committed to “open discussion” about difficult topics, she added that the district must be “mindful of the potential of negative distractions if we are not proactive in reviewing the content and planning its presentation carefully.” 

Even in a time when caricatures of CRT have become a dominant prop in right-wing political theater, the call for “proactive” reviews of teacher training materials suggests a disturbing new development: the preemptive censorship of straightforward historical instruction — even when aimed at adults rather than students — out of fear that the content might spark community or political outrage. 

“It’s unfortunate that school districts in what is supposedly the ‘freest state’ in the nation are so concerned about retaliation from the governor that they feel compelled to review and censor instructional materials,” said Andrew Spar, the president of the Florida Education Association, the state’s largest labor union. “As this kind of second-guessing goes on in districts throughout the state, Florida’s public schools are experiencing severe and sometimes overwhelming shortages of teachers and support staff. Inciting fear in our districts and classrooms is not the way to attract more employees. It does nothing to help students.” 

“What happened in this case is a really good example of how [the anti-CRT discourse] is going to affect everyone, and the kinds of erasure of history or censorship we’re going to see,” said Kirk Bailey, political director of the Florida ACLU. “In this case, it’s even pre-censorship. The legislation being discussed in Tallahassee hasn’t even passed, and we’re already seeing school districts changing their behavior. I think we just don’t know how far it could go.” 

Butler warned that what happens in Florida could become a disastrous national model, quoting documentary filmmaker Billy Corben’s maxim that “the Florida of today is the America of tomorrow.” 

“That has always resonated with me,” Butler said, “because what we’ve learned from the Florida experience is that, ever since the passage of Brown, this state has perfected the tactics of stonewalling, delaying and complicating the process of integration. That’s Florida’s contribution to the civil rights narrative: You can’t stop it, but you can slow it down. You can stonewall, delay and use rhetoric to say, ‘This isn’t about civil rights, this is about laws, this is about procedures, this is about local parents determining their own decisions for their children.'” 

Today, he said, that historical narrative is playing out again. And the only silver lining he sees is that developments like these may force educators, and the rest of the country, to recognize “what the stakes are in this battle.” 

Read more on “critical race theory” and the education battle:

Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna applaud Arizona Democrats for censure of Kyrsten Sinema

Citing Sen. Kyrsten Sinema’s obstruction of her own party’s pro-democracy agenda, a pair of progressive U.S. lawmakers said Sunday that they support the Arizona Democratic Party’s decision to censure the senator who helped stymie voting rights legislation.

Citing her failure to “do whatever it takes to ensure the health of our democracy,” the Arizona Democratic Party (ADP) central committee on Saturday voted to formally censure Sinema.

The ADP rebuke came after Sinema voted last week — along with all 50 Republican senators and Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. — to uphold the filibuster and effectively torpedo her own party’s popular voting rights legislation, the Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act.

Asked about the move during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday morning, Sen. Bernie Sanders said, “I think it’s exactly right.”

RELATED: Kyrsten Sinema, a traitor to the cause of women’s rights, loses support of feminists

“Look, on the issue of voting rights … right now you have a Republican Party under Trump’s leadership that is perpetuating this ‘Big Lie’ that Trump actually won the election,” Sanders said. “You have 19 Republican states that are moving very aggressively into voter suppression, into extreme gerrymandering; some of these states are doing away with the powers of independent election officials.”

“They are moving in a very, very anti-democratic way, and it was absolutely imperative that we change the rules so we can pass strong voting rights legislation,” Sanders added. “All Republicans voted against us. Two Democrats voted against us. That was a terrible, terrible vote, and I think what the Arizona Democratic Party did was exactly right.”

Appearing on MSNBC, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said: “If you are a Democrat and you can’t uphold the fundamental right to vote for all citizens … then there’s a problem. And I think what the Arizona state party is saying is that Kyrsten Sinema no longer reflects our values.”

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Following its decision to censure Sinema, ADP chair Raquel Terán said in a statement that “the Arizona Democratic Party is a diverse coalition with plenty of room for policy disagreements, however on the matter of the filibuster and the urgency to protect voting rights, we have been crystal clear.”

“In the choice between an archaic legislative norm and protecting Arizonans’ right to vote, we choose the latter, and we always will,” Terán continued. “The ramifications of failing to pass federal legislation that protects their right to vote are too large and far-reaching.”

Addressing Sinema’s prospects going forward, Khanna said: “I don’t think there’s any chance she wins a Democratic primary. Whether it’s Ruben Gallego or someone else, there are a number of other people who I think would not just win against her in a Democratic primary, but would win decisively. … I would be shocked if she was competitive in a Democratic primary in Arizona.” 

Gallego, a Democratic House member who is widely viewed as a potential 2024 primary challenger to the embattled senator, reacted to the ADP censure by saying Saturday that “any reservoir of goodwill that [Sinema] had is gone.”

Read more on Kyrsten Sinema and the downfall of Joe Biden’s agenda:

Allen Weisselberg couldn’t explain how value of $400M Trump property doubled in one year: report

Allen Weisselberg, former chief financial officer for the Trump Organization, faced difficulty explaining how one of the company’s properties had been valued at approximately 435 million — more than double what it had been valued the year before — according to newly released documents.

On Tuesday, January 18, the documents were released by New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office. “‘Mr. Weisselberg testified that he could not explain this discrepancy,” the documents reportedly said.

According to Business Insider, there is incriminating documentation that alleges assets throughout former President Donald Trump’s financial portfolio of businesses and real estate properties had been mis-valued. There is also speculation that the valuations could be part of an elaborate financial fraud scheme.

On the list of properties, the Trump International Golf Club Scotland was highlighted.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

Officials believe the increased value appears to center on “assuming the right to build 2,500 luxury homes on the property – despite approval to build fewer than 1,500 holiday apartments and golf villas.”

On Wednesday, January 19 the Trump Organization released a statement criticizing the investigation, and arguing that it is a politically-motivated tactic aimed at damaging the former president.

“The only one misleading the public is Letitia James. She defrauded New Yorkers by basing her entire candidacy on a promise to get Trump at all costs without having seen a shred of evidence and in violation of every conceivable ethical rule,” said the statement.

The latest development comes months after Weisselberg was charged with multiple offenses in connection with an alleged tax evasion scheme involving the Trump Organization.

Read more stories like this:

Chief Jan. 6 investigator fired from state job by Virginia’s new Republican AG: report

According to a report from the Washington Post, a University of Virginia counsel who has been on leave to help with the Jan 6th investigation has been fired by Virginia’s new Republican attorney general.

AG Jason Miyares took over as the 48th Attorney General of Virginia on January 15 and has proceeded to conduct a mass purge of approximately 30 staffers which included attorney Tim Heaphy.

On August 12,2021, Heaphy was designated by House riot committee chair Bennie Thompson (D-MS) as the Chief Investigative Counsel for the Select Committee. In his annoucement he stated, “It’s good news for the Select Committee and for the American people that Mr. Heaphy has agreed to come onboard as our top investigator. Mr. Heaphy is a committed public servant with deep experience tackling complex and high-profile challenges. The Committee will need his expertise as we push ahead quickly on a number of fronts. I’m grateful for his willingness to support the Committee’s work getting answers about January 6th and protecting our democracy.”

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

That didn’t stop Miyarres from firing Heaphy, the WaPo reports.

“Tim Heaphy, who had worked at the state school for about three years, was among roughly 30 staffers who were let go by Jason Miyares shortly before he took office a little over a week ago. Democrats have questioned the firings and how they were carried out,” the Post is reporting. “Victoria LaCivita, a Miyares spokeswoman, said the attorney general’s office had also fired the counsel for George Mason University, Brian Walther, but offered no explanation for why he was let go. George Mason referred questions about Walther’s firing to Miyares’s office. Walther did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Both Heaphy and Walther are Democrats.”

You can read more here.

More on the continuing aftermath of Jan. 6, 2021:

The 15 most boring movies of the past 20 years

Movies can be transformative cultural experiences that stay with you the rest of your life. Or they can be complete disasters that make you wish you had never pressed play in the first place. In between are movies that are simply boring. But how can you quantify such a subjective reaction?

Consumer technology site Uswitch.com opted to go straight to the source — viewers. The site analyzed user ratings on IMDb for negative keywords and poor reviews that could indicate a movie is not only bad but a complete waste of time and bandwidth.

Here’s what they cite as some of the most boring movies of recent decades:

  1. “The Last Airbender” (2010)
  2. “Annabelle” (2014)
  3. “Suicide Squad” (2016)
  4. “Total Recall” (2012)
  5. “Battle Los Angeles” (2011)
  6. “Justice League” (2017)
  7. “Green Lantern” (2011)
  8. “Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace” (1999)
  9. “Alice in Wonderland” (2010)
  10. “Clash of the Titans” (2010)
  11. “The Wolfman” (2010)
  12. “Ice Age: Continental Drift” (2012)
  13. “White House Down” (2013)
  14. “X-Men: Apocalypse” (2016)
  15. “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs 2” (2013)

Taking the top spot is director M. Night Shyamalan’s “The Last Airbender,” a live-action adaptation of the popular Nickelodeon series that apparently didn’t win over fans with high expectations. The same is probably what sunk the first “Star Wars” prequel, while a remake of 1990’s “Total Recall” failed to justify its own existence.

You can head to Uswitch.com for a similar rundown of the most boring holiday movies, though be forewarned that “Star Wars” fans won’t have much luck in that department, either.

When a doctor forced Sean Astin to hear his “Lord of the Rings” complaint

Twenty years ago, “The Lord of the Rings” movies were tearing up the box office and delighting fantasy fans everywhere. The cast — including Sean Astin as the ever-loyal hobbit Samwise Gamgee — were major celebrities, shuttled to and fro from event to event in limos. They met many a passionate fan, including some who went the extra mile to get their complaints heard.

Astin recalled the story of one such fan to Screen Rant. “[W]e jump in the limo and there’s this guy knocking on the window because people were always like . . . It was like a Beatles movie, they were always chasing after you. It was crazy,” he remembered. “But this guy, he was dressed fancy. So I rolled the window down a little bit, and he puts an envelope through the thing, and he is like, ‘Hi, I’m Dr. So-and-so.’ He’s like, ‘I have to tell Peter Jackson that there’s a mistake, or there’s an anomaly,’ or something like that.”

When the cave troll comes into Balin’s Tomb [in The Fellowship of the Ring], and it’s really the first time the Fellowship sets up as a group, and we’re fighting him. I’m using pots and pans on orcs, and Elijah’s got the mithril vest to stave off the orc, or the whatever, the cave troll stabs him with the spear. Well, Balin’s Tomb, the dwarf is lit by a ray of sunlight, and the cave troll passes through it. Well, if you know the Hobbit, when trolls encounter sunlight, they turn to stone. This cardiologist had identified this seam in the universe, in the mythology where we had made this mistake. I just remember thinking, ‘I don’t think we can redo it now, man.'”

Obviously, this was when “Fellowship of the Ring” came out, so it was indeed too late to fix anything.

I also love that Astin actually accepted this guy’s envelope — like, that could have been anything in there — because he was “dressed fancy.” Let that be a lesson: if you want people to listen to whatever you have to say, put on your best evening wear; they’ll be so dazzled that they’ll hear you out for a minute before discovering that what you’re saying isn’t worth listening to.

Sean Astin still wants justice for Barb in “Stranger Things”

Astin worked consistently after “Lord of the Rings,” and had another viral spike when he played Bob in the second season of “Stranger Things,” a super nice guy who unfortunately is torn apart by interdimensional monsters in the season finale. Whoops.

Astin is more or less okay with what happened to Bob, but he still wants justice for Barbara Holland, who suffered a similar fate in season 1 but had no one to spread her story, because no one realizes exactly what happened.

“This is the thing. Bob had justice,” Astin said. “He died a hero’s death. Barb, no one knows what the hell happened. We need justice for Barb! We can have a statue for Bob, kind of a hero’s… Maybe I’ll stride a horse or something to recognize . . . Rename the Hawkins school after him or something like that. But he had . . . What is justice?”

Yeah, what is justice? A question for the philosophers . . . or the writers on “Stranger Things” season 4, which is coming out late this year!

Why we care about finding patient zero

“It’s a natural instinct to want to find the causes and sources of problems,” says Dr. Lydia Kang. As a practicing physician, Kang understands the value of investigating the origins of illnesses. And as the co-author, with historian Nate Pedersen, of “Patient Zero: A Curious History of the World’s Worst Diseases,” she also recognizes how quickly our curiosity can turn into something far less benevolent.

There’s no more telling contemporary example of collaboration and polarization than the intense, often accusatory response to our current pandemic. In the early days in 2020, coronavirus contagion anxiety and the frantic search for the “ground zero of a new virus,” was quickly weaponized into a rash of anti-Asian hate crimes and racist rhetoric like Trump’s references to “kung flu.” Now, Reddit’s sardonic “Herman Cain Award” sub identifies vaccine skeptics and mask mandate defiers who’ve succumbed to COVID-19 infections. It’s named in honor of the former Republican presidential candidate and face mask refuser, who died a month after attending Trump’s infamous 2020 Tulsa rally. As body counts rise, we seek solutions. We also want names. We want a source. And we want a culprit.

Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.

In “Patient Zero,” the authors — whose previous collaboration “Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything” similarly explored the double edge of good intentions — look at the stages of infection, viral spread and eventual containment through the lens of some of humanity’s most baffling and bedeviling outbreaks. It’s a rich and thought-provoking book, filled with historical photographs, artwork, and unique accounts of patients and researchers grappling for answers in the midst of the most appalling and heartbreaking circumstances imaginable. It’s also a profound reconsideration of our common understanding of our most famous stories of sickness and science. What’s the truth about those notorious “smallpox blankets” European colonizers brought with them to the Americas? Were “Typhoid” Mary Mallon and early HIV patient Gaëtan Dugas really as reckless as their infamy suggests? What are the lessons from how rabies, polio, mad cow disease and the 1918 influenza outbreak were managed that inform our current response to COVID? And when does “a beacon of hope come in the form of poop”?

Salon talked to Kang recently about our endless search for “Patient Zero,” how she and Pedersen found themselves writing about historic pandemics in the midst of a modern one, and what we really need to understand about our outbreak origin stories.

This conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.

There is an understandable scientific imperative to trace the origins of viruses and diseases, but in the wider world, that can become a shorthand path to blaming individuals. What have we gotten wrong about “Typhoid Mary,” about Gaëtan Dugas, and about the idea of “Patient Zero” in general?

Whenever we get a cold, we tend to point a finger at a colleague or friend who was sneezing nearby. Something we realized early on was how this book could be construed as a finger-pointing exercise, but we knew it would be far more complex and less blameworthy. If anything, these stories show how layered the issues are, and how we, as an entire species, are responsible for so many new pathogens in this world.

And often, the Patient Zeroes are complicated individuals. Gaëtan Dugas was a multifaceted human being, faulty at times, but generous as well. That is not well construed when many people think of him as the Patient Zero of the HIV and AIDS crisis of the 1980s, which he most certainly is not. 

At times, we try to go beyond the first person with the first disease and try to find the spillover event, if there even was one. It was fascinating to find that tuberculosis, for example, has evolved right along with us for thousands upon thousands of years. 

RELATED: To combat labor shortage, states are letting healthcare workers work while testing positive for COVID

This is a book about very real human beings who faced unprecedented medical challenges. It’s very easy —  especially now  — to feel awash in statistics. What drew you to this topic for your book, and was there a story that particularly affected you?

We were tossing around ideas for a follow-up to “Quackery” in the fall of 2019, and decided on this topic of Patient Zero stories and how epidemics and pandemics unfold. It wasn’t until early 2020 that we realized we’d be writing a pandemic book while living in one. 

We each of us had stories we particularly felt drawn to. I was fascinated by prions (and also like to eat cheeseburgers), so the mad cow chapter was absolutely fascinating for me to write and research. 

Writing the chapter on the plague (we of course had to write about THE plague of all plagues) was especially hard given the amount of anti-Asian xenophobia that occurred during the outbreak of the plague in Chinatown, San Francisco at the turn of the last century. It was haunting, the echoes of what is happening today with COVID. 

You show the speed of innovation in times of crisis. What do you think the ways in which medical mysteries have been approached in the past can teach us about how to better prepare for future ones, and handle our current one?

Technology and medicine are both developing so rapidly that no doubt we will continue to do better in future pandemics than this one. The fact that roll outs for medicine discovery, diagnostic kits, cooperation between nations, and cooperation of the public on a public health levels has been far from ideal shows that we have much to improve upon and learn from. Science dictates that there is nuance in the data, and many parts of the population do not do well with nuance or gray zones. Politics are everywhere, and disparities continue to be severe. So I predict that future pandemics will always have difficulty on various levels as they are discovered and tackled. 

You end the book talking about the opposite of the Patient Zero, focusing on the last smallpox patients and the power of progress. Why was it meaningful to tell those stories as well?

We wanted to end by showing how there is hope for the eradication of some diseases, and that though polio, TB, and measles still exist in the world, we have the means to treat and prevent them. Humans are ultimately a hardy species that sets so much of its energy on survival. We are not easily killed, and achieve astonishing milestones in trying to do good things for humanity. Let’s not forget that. 

More stories on science and history: 

12 natural wines for those intimidated by natural wine

Whether you’re in a sunlit, open–shelf lined shop full of people in hats you suspect are fashionable, or you’re hovering around a bar so dimly lit that it’s hard to read small text, selecting the best natural wine can be very stressful.

What doesn’t help is that the labels often tout lesser-known grapes and regions, as if the esoteric wine knowledge you’d memorized went to a Summer of Love concert. People throw around phrases like “carbonic maceration” and “Ella, that’s not a sample.” And natural wine — like veganism, or nihilism — is most often defined by what it is not. It’s not full of additives. It’s not full of chemicals, like vineyard pesticides. It’s not wine that’s sustained heavy interference (lab-grown yeast and the like) during the fermentation process. But what exactly is natural wine and how is it different from organic or conventional wine?

What is natural wine?

“Natural wine is wine without crap in it,” writes Alice Feiring, limited intervention-wine savant and evangelist, in her recent book “Natural Wine for the People.” (Her newsletter, “The Feiring Line“, is a worthwhile dispatch on the subject.) “You first start with organic viticulture of some sort — in other words, you farm your grapes organically. Then, once the grapes are harvested and you start the wine-making process, you don’t add anything foreign or remove anything from the wine, nor do you shape it with machines.” There is, of course, some wiggle room, she notes: “Sometimes a sulfur derivative may be added, as a preservative, and in a minimal amount. The ideal, however, is that there is none.” On the other hand, certified organic wine is labeled as such if the grapes are grown without the use of chemical fertilizers or pesticides. However, that doesn’t mean that it’s natural; organic wine can still contain additives and large-scale forms of conventional processing, which is a big no-no in the natural wine industry.

By some accounts, the practice of making wine without additives actually dates back thousands of years, but the more recent upswing in American consumption is traced — at least in part — to Jenny Lefcourt. She began her import business Jenny & François Selections when, living abroad in Paris in the late 1990s, she stumbled upon a circle of winemakers creating stuff that just tasted better than the other wines out there. In the beginning, she says, “people started using the term vin vivant, for wine that’s alive.” Over time, she says, “even though it’s a fraught term,” the world began to call it “natural wine.”

Across the Atlantic in the early days, importers like Jenny & François Selections and Louis Dressner became evangelists for these natural wines. Backed by writers like Feiring, Marissa Ross, Isabelle Legeron, and others — plus pioneering sommeliers and shop owners — it eventually took hold in bars and restaurants from Los Angeles to Charleston to Kansas City. Today in New York City, you can barely walk 10 city blocks without stumbling upon a spot like Ten Bells, or Wildair, or The Four Horsemen, pouring fermented grape juice in shades that’d make my mom immediately suspect it was corked.

What about pét nat?

If you’re into wine, particularly natural wine, then you’ve likely heard murmurings about pet nat. That’s is the abbreviated term for “pétillant naturel” — a French term that essentially means a naturally sparkling wine. You’ll sound fancy saying it and you’ll look even fancier sipping a flute of it. Pet nat wines follow the same ideology as other forms of natural wines, which means dialing back to ancient practices and producing the wine in small batches. Many types of pet nat are also considered organic and biodynamic wines (but remember not all organic wines are natural wines).

Pét-nats differ from traditional champagne in that it does not undergo a second fermentation, when sugar and yeast are added to the champagne. They’re also generally cheaper (around $20 to $30 for a bottle), a little funkier tasting, and have a lower ABV than champagne. If you’re used to drinking bubbly from the big champagne houses, pet nats will catch you by surprise. They’re approachable, yet experimental, and waiting to be embraced by anyone willing to give them a chance.

Natural wine is good

Say it louder for the people in the back! That’s just one common misconception, according to Feiring. In her book, she lists a handful of others: that natural wines taste like cider, that all natural wines are cloudy, or are fizzy. “I also really hate the reductionism that natural wine is low-alcohol,” she says. Another, adds Lefcourt, is that natural wines are not worthy of aging.

“The thing about natural wine is that it brought such diversity to the wine world, that you cannot put it in a box,” says Feiring.

So, if you haven’t yet joined its hordes of fans, whatever your hesitation, here are 12 natural wines we think you should start with:

12 natural wines for those intimidated by natural wine

1. The white to break out with a creamy, stinky cheese: Martha Stoumen, 2018 Honeymoon

Martha Stoumen, a Sonoma-based natural winemaker, turns out bright and flavorful bottles from Northern California grapes. The 2018 Honeymoon is made from Chardonnay and Colombard, and tastes like honeycomb. Thanks to some botrytis — noble rot! — in the latter (a “once in a decade condition,” per Stoumen), there’s some gentle sweetness that fades over the course of each sip, balanced by a nice level of acidity.

2. The red for shattering your expectations: E.T. Emilie Mutombo 2018, Partida Creus

This cranberry juice-colored red from Emilie Mutombo in Catalonia is light, punchy, and pleasantly bitter, like raspberries in May, or Jolly Ranchers that’ve ditched their sucrose. It’s made from Cartoixa Vermell and Garrut, the Catalan name for Monastrell (aka Mourvèdre). Pair with rigatoni in a spicy sausage cream sauce and share only with people you truly like.

3. The orange wine for those who balk at the words “orange wine”: Marigny, 2018 Pinot Gris Carbonic Maceration

Andrew Young — apparently “a son of Louisiana who once drummed for a Texas rock trio that sounded like no other” — makes wine in the Willamette Valley of Oregon, and he’s had the Marigny label since 2015. His 2018 Pinot Gris Carbonic Maceration marks a clear-cut example of one of the few times it’s worthwhile to say “carbonic maceration” in front of a stranger. (Which, Feiring writes in “Natural Wine for the People,” is when, “Whole bunches of grapes are put into a tank and sealed. Fermentation happens inside of the berries and they burst from the resulting pressure. Juice starts to accumulate and that juice continues to ferment, either in the tank, or it is bled off and continues to ferment in another vessel.”) This Pinot Gris hovers between rose-tones and more of a tangerine-tint depending on the light, and tastes like a creamsicle dipped in wine — even orange wine haters will love it. It’s refreshing, citrusy, the tiniest bit savory, and will grip you and never let you go, but in a good way, like your favorite pair of sunglasses, or a Shonda Rhimes show you claim to not still watch.

4. The pét-nat for the faint of palate: Château Barouillet, Splash

Presenting a great excuse to use the term “pét-nat” in front of company: the Splash! from Château Barouillet, made by an eighth-generation family business in Southwestern France. Pétillant naturel, by the way, technically just means naturally fizzy — it’s wine that’s bottled before it’s finished its first fermentation. As it ferments in its bottle, newly produced carbon dioxide begets carbonation. This one’s made from Semillon, and drinks like an almost-demure sparkling wine, with the littlest clip of tang. It’s perfect as-is for a warm-weather daytime situation, but personally, I love it with a splash — no pun intended — of Cocchi Rossa.

5. The red for your most fun friend: La Casa Vieja, Mission 2017

Humberto “Tito” Toscano makes his La Casa Vieja wine from 120-year-old original-rootstock-vineyards in the Northwestern part of Mexico’s Baja peninsula. The Mission 2017 is made from Mission grapes, of course — themselves a reference to the eighteenth-century Spanish monks who snaked their way down the coast building missions and vineyards. It’s a juicy, pert red that tastes like (don’t freak out!) Smarties.

6. The gamay you should bring to every dinner party: Morantin 2018 Touraine Gamay “La Boudinerie”

Winemaker Noëlla Morantin acquired part of the Clos Roche Blanche vineyard in Touraine, France, which wine people tell me — haunting look in their eyes — is a very big deal. I might surmise as much even without their insistence, because it’s completely delicious. Think ripe berry energy — this Touraine Gamay “La Boudinerie” is best served chilled, and makes a fantastic counterpart to rotisserie chicken, mofongo, and pernil.

7. The red that sends your mouth on a vacation: Arianna Occhipinti, IGT Rosso SP68, 2018

Arianna Occhipinti’s IGT Rosso SP68, 2018 is purportedly named after a highway near her home in Vittoria, Sicily, but rest assured it tastes nothing like a highway! It’s part-Nero d’Avola, part-Frappato, and I never really believed people when they said they tasted cherries in wine until I tried it. Thanks to the subtlest effervescence, the wine feels almost alive in your mouth, with a flavor that’s equal parts sharp, mellow, and sunny — like the first day of a long vacation.

8. The cabernet franc for livening up your night: Inconnu, Lalalu Cabernet Franc 2018

Laura Brennan Bissell’s Lalalu Cabernet Franc 2018 from Contra Costa, California smells like bell peppers, and tastes like ripe berries. This is a bottle of wine that seems, at first pour, like it could be heavy but turns out to be delightfully light.

9. The sparkling one to bring to a morning-after brunch: 2019 Sparkling Jus Jus

This fizzy verjus (aka, pressed juice of unripened grapes) is a collaboration between Julia Sherman of Salad for President fame, and Martha Stoumen. It’s slightly fermented until bubbly, and is low in ABV, coming in at just 3.4%. The resulting Sparkling Jus Jus is a not-quite-wine with sweet and tart Kombucha vibes.

10. A rosé for your happiest hour: La Garagista Lupo In Bocca

Deirdre Heekin and Caleb Barber’s “Lupo in Bocca” Rosé is made from a field blend in one of their Vermont vineyards. Don’t let its dark rosy red facade fool you: the flavor’s light and tart, like strawberries mashed with a couple of citrus peels for pert bitterness. It’s neither too dry nor too sweet to drink . . . any time of day.

11. The chuggable chilled red: Las Jaras Glou Glou

The Glou Glou made by Las Jaras (Joel Burt and Eric Wareheim) from a bunch of grapes I find difficult to pronounce — Carignan, Zinfandel, Valdiguie, Charbono — is pretty much the only thing that makes pizza better. It’s named after one of those natural wine buzz-terms, glou-glou, the French description of a gulpable wine, which is, coincidentally, also the sound I make when I eat pizza too fast.

12. Fizzy rosé for any special occasion: ZAFA’s Don Quixote 2017

Krista Scruggs’ Don Quixote 2017 is made from Ruby Cabernet, which is both a cross made from Carignan and Cabernet Sauvignon, and the ideal name for a karaoke-belting alter-ego. The rosé pét-nat is satisfyingly fizzy with the sort of elegant, unmuddled finish that might cause your party guest to confuse it with Champagne if you forced him to taste it with his eyes closed.

The best garlic bread has a secret ingredient and takes 10 minutes

There’s a scene in Patricia Cornwell’s new novel, “Autopsy,” where protagonist Kay Scarpetta makes a garlic bread so mouthwateringly described you can almost smell the aroma of it rising off your Kindle. In real life, Cornwell admits she doesn’t know the secret of Scarpetta’s bread. “Staci, my partner, she makes garlic bread,” the author told me on “Salon Talks” recently. “It is the best thing you’ve ever tasted, and she won’t tell me. There’s some secret ingredient in it, and she hides it.”

 

Want more great food writing and recipes? Subscribe to Salon Food’s newsletter.

For the rest of us, garlic bread doesn’t have to be a mystery. It only seems daunting because it’s a ubiquitous, seemingly simple dish — with a thousand variations. Olive oil or butter? No cheese, or cheese? What kind of cheese? If there’s mozzarella involved, have you made cheesy bread, not garlic bread? How much garlic should you use? What kind of bread? Which way should you slice the bread? Is garlic powder a sacrilege, or a requirement?

RELATED: The garlickiest, butteriest, simplest pasta sauce

The best garlic bread, to my mind, is the one you love to make and eat. That said, there is some consensus on what makes a truly exceptional crowd pleaser. In 2021, both Insider and The Kitchn tested out a variety of celebrity chef garlic bread recipes, and in both cases, Guy Fieri’s offering emerged the victor. What is it about the mayor of Flavortown’s formula that makes it so damn addictive? I would wager that the loads of butter don’t hurt. But it’s those few shakes of hot sauce that take it completely over the top. Could this be the secret ingredient of Kay Scarpetta’s garlic bread too? It’s definitely the kind of dish that could inspire a novel, or at least some very enthusiastic poetry.

Process also plays a part here, too. I concur with Fieri and with Preppy Kitchen’s John Kanell in believing the less slicing, the better. Split that bread in half, smear it with the good stuff, and figure out the rest at the table. I have tweaked Fieri’s bread slightly to make it more of a weeknight family dish, using a smaller loaf and less butter, but a more generous amount of garlic. I also melt the ingredients into the butter, because it infuses every bite with garlic flavor. Finally, I advise that it’s crucial to really toast your bread — it should not be pale and limp but unmistakably golden and crunchy. You could, I suppose, use the leftovers for croutons. There will not be any.

***

Recipe: The world’s greatest garlic bread

Inspired by Guy Fieri

Yields
4 – 6 servings
Prep Time
5 minutes
Cook Time
5 minutes

Ingredients

  • 1 stick of butter
  • 4 cloves of minced garlic
  • 1 minced scallion
  • 1 tablespoon of chopped parsley, or cilantro if you prefer
  • Salt and pepper, to taste
  • Hot sauce, to taste
  • 1 demi loaf of French bread
  • 2 tablespoons of freshly grated Parmesan

 

Directions

Step 1
Preheat your broiler.

Step 2
In a small saucepan over medium heat, gently melt your butter. Stir in your garlic, scallion, hot sauce, parsley, salt and pepper. (You can also microwave the butter for 30 seconds or so in a microwave safe bowl to melt.)

Step 3
Split your bread in half lengthwise and put on a sheet pan, split side facing up.

Step 4
Gently pour your butter mixture evenly over both pieces of bread. Top with your grated cheese.

Step 5

Broil for at least 3 minutes, or until completely golden and toasted. Just keep an eye on it. Serve immediately.

 

More of our best dishes for garlic obsessives: 

You’re only 3 ingredients and 10 minutes away from the herbiest bean soup ever

Beans have been having quite the sustained moment as the pandemic plods along. A Rancho Gordo Bean Club membership has become a status symbol, while several “Bon Appetit” alumni have released clothing decorated with legumes. #Beanfluencer is a recognized hashtag as cooks go viral making humble pots and pulses.

Over the last half a decade, “bean and lentil consumption in the U.S. increased by 73% to a combined 14.5 pounds per capita,” according to Quartz. Why, exactly, did this happen? I think there are a few reasons.

Beans are high in protein and a great source of fiber. They’re tough to mess up, as they’re one of the ultimate “set it and forget it” foods. And, most importantly, they take on flavor really, really well. They’re the perfect supporting cast member for flashy warm spices, splashes of acidity and scene-stealing herbs, as you’ll see with this super easy 3-ingredient soup. 

RELATED: Want healthy in a hurry? Try our favorite beans and greens recipes

Store-bought pesto — which contains basil, crushed pine nuts, garlic, olive oil and a little parmesan cheese — is doing the bulk of the heavy-lifting here. You can totally go for the jarred stuff in the pasta aisle, but there are often small tubs of fresh pesto available in the section where refrigerated hummus and dips are located. Give those a try sometime! 

The other two ingredients are, unsurprisingly, beans and stock. For beans, there’s a fair amount of flexibility in what works here. I like white or tan beans that tend to get a little creamy, so cannellini beans, navy beans or even pinto beans would be good options. In terms of stock, chicken or vegetable varieties both work well. Just go with the best quality you can find (or make!) for whatever option you choose.

***

Recipe: Herby Bean Soup 

Yields
2 servings
Prep Time
00 minutes
Cook Time
10 minutes

Ingredients

  • 15 ounces canned or cooked cannellini or navy beans, bean liquid reserved
  • 2 cups good-quality chicken or vegetable stock 
  • 3 tablespoons pesto 
  • Salt and pepper to taste

Directions

  1. In a large pot, combine the beans and stock. Season with salt and pepper to taste. Bring to a low simmer, and if you reserved any bean liquid from the cooking process or can, add a tablespoon or two to the mixture. 
  2. Stir in the pesto until completely combined. Season again to taste and divide among bowls before garnishing.

Cook’s Notes

This bean soup is delicious in its simplicity, but feel free to add to it. Nice additions include crumbled Italian sausage and dried red pepper flakes; an extra squeeze of lemon juice and some additional fresh herbs as garnish; or an extra sprinkle of parmesan cheese and a nice hunk of toasted bread.

 

More super simple weeknight meals: 

Salon Food writes about stuff we think you’ll like. Salon has affiliate partnerships, so we may get a share of the revenue from your purchase.