website. Welcome everyone to LMDA's conference 2021. My name is Brenna Muñoz and I am the conference coordinator. Thank you all for your patience. This panel, Mexico City 2006, Mexico City 2021 and Beyond, will be presented in English. But remember that we have oral simultaneous interpretation available through Web Switcher Pro. That's an app that you can all download on your phones or gadgets and you can take a look at the token in our virtual hub on their oral simultaneous interpretation. Hola a todos, mi nombre es Brenna Muñoz, soy plena de la del Congreso LMDA 2021. Me da mucho gusto darles la bienvenida a este panel, Ciudad de Mexico 2006, Ciudad de Mexico 2021 y más allá. Este panel será presentado en inglés, pero recuerden que tenemos acceso a interpretación oral simultánea a través de Web Switcher Pro, una app que pueden descargar en sus teléfonos o en sus gadgets y pueden encontrar el token acceso en nuestro virtual hub debajo de interpretación oral simultánea. Now I will leave this panel to the all stars of LMDA. So you guys, thank you very much for being here. And the panel is yours. Thank you, Brenda. Thank you, Brenda. Brenda, my partner in this Liz Engelman and I would like to work to you and your colleagues, as well as Martin, Ryan Moore, LMDA, obviously hollow around, involved for allowing this to happen today. In many ways I think what we want to do is to invite everyone to what really is a kind of reunion after 15, 16 years that Liz Engelman and I started. We had a sort of odd, quixotic notion about 15, 16 years ago. Liz will share more of those thoughts and a number of people will share memories of that a bit a little later on. But I think it started with a notion that was primarily about curiosity on our part. Our organization, Literary Managers and Dramaturgies of the Americas, which was founded in the mid-1980s, was originally Literary Managers and Dramaturgies of the Americas. Then became Literary Managers and Dramaturgies of the Americas. And at a certain point I think we began to feel a little old shabby about that. We felt that we needed to extend the notion of what that might be. And part of that was not a colonialist gesture, surely, not at all. But it was about kind of curiosity on our part and the need to find out about what was taking place in terms of how theater was being made beyond our southern borders. And so that discussions that we began to have, and largely Liz and I were having them and many of our Canadian colleagues gave me the courage to write a letter to a friend of my gifted playwright, director, producer, Sabina Berman. And in that letter I asked her about what was taking place in terms of playwriting, dramaturgy, and what were the issues that were facing artists in the 21st century in Mexico and Central and South America. And in that letter I literally had the courage or audacity to ask her the following. This may sound like a dream, Sabina, but I believe we need to break down, begin to break down between our communities, the not so invisible artistic borders that exist now. That began something. We had a series of letters, a series of exchanges, and I shared them also with my colleague Liz Aylman. I at the time was the board president of LNDA. Liz was the incoming president of LNDA. And Liz had many initiatives in mind for the future of LNDA. And we, in June of 2004, decided to fly down to Mexico, Mexico City, and to meet with Sabina, which we did. At the same time we saw Sabina's extraordinary production of extras, stones based on marine stones and stones in pockets, and that then also with a number of people, including the late Victor Hugo Rasconbanda. And I'm sure Liz will talk later about that event, which was an amazing event. To this day still has an impact on me. We also, at that time, Sylvia Piles, who you will hear from a little later. We began to have plans at that time about a LNDA conference. We had lofty plans. And I always think about the first season of the HBO series, Deadwood, based on that Wild Wild West town in South Dakota, that one of the founding fathers of that Brechty and Mahogoni of the High Plains, what he once said is, if you want to hear God laugh, tell him your plans. Well, our lofty plans, our initial lofty plans began to fall apart. And we ended up in this, which is spring of 2006, planning a much more modified conference. But thanks to the Mexico City planners, we ended up being invited. And it was a gift, tremendous gift at that time, especially under Mario Espinosa's direction, being invited to the Port of America's festival. I'm going to hold this up. I have my own props. I always have props if you're going to have a keynote address. And it was an extraordinary event. We were invited, 10 LNDA delegates from Canada and the United States. We were hosted over a three day period. I won't talk about too much because my colleagues will talk about that specifically. But we flew down to Mexico City in 2006. And it was an extraordinary event. And again, we were treated so graciously. And I say that we began to plant some seeds. We were helped. We were guided. So many wonderful panels took place. I will tell one memory of so many other wonderful memories. I, this Yankee dramaturge, who really was there on the mission of great curiosity, tried to lead a panel with 20 playwrights. And I went around the room in a circular way, asking what their plays were about. And I had great curiosity. It was not a full curiosity. But after about five of them, politely, shared some things I realized having taught for many, many years at different places, realized they were merely being polite to this Yankee dramaturge. And I stopped and I said, I think this is enough. You're being very polite to me. I want to ask something else. Because I knew, as I believe, of a major presidential election that was about to happen. And I asked the question, you as an artist, as a citizen of Mexico, right now in Mexico, what is it that you fear the most? Let's go around the room. And at that moment, that triggered a forest of hands. And everyone from their heart, their artistic heart, started to talk about what they feared as artists. And it was an amazing moment for me. And that was an incredible moment. And at the end of that three days, I confessed my shame as an United States citizen, perhaps as an artist too, at the prospect of a wall that was beginning to go up. And now 15 years later, we know, in a more concrete way, unfortunately, at the prospect of a wall, and I reminded them that they cannot build a wall around our curiosity. They cannot prevent our imaginations from touching. And I'd like to believe that LMDA, and this LMDA conference today, June, reflects those, the Mexico conference that's happening in June 28, 29, that those imaginations continue to touch 15 years later. I'd now like to turn it over to my other colleagues to begin to introduce themselves one by one, and then also convey their memories of that time. Perhaps we could start. I know Conchi is going off to rehearsal. Conchi, could we start with you? Hello, Conchi. Hello, hello. I'm sorry. I think my English is not good enough. So I don't understand all that you say. Maybe Brenda can help us. Yes, please, please. Hola, my old friend. Hola, Brenda, are you, estás ahí? Hola Conchi, aquí estoy, claro que sí. Es que no, no entiendo todo si me puedes traducir un poquito. Claro que sí. Y si te sientes más cómoda hablando en español, estoy segura que nuestros intérpretes podrán voltear todo el audio en inglés. Sí, mejor. I see. Mike, do you want to repeat that question for Conchi? Okay, look, what is what you guys move here? No, no, no, no, no. All we we're now moving into part two. The the it's just now we're in a section we're all talking about sharing your memories of that period in 2006, when we were at the Porta de la America's Festival, and then after that, the results of that time. And for example, Liz and I saw, and the other delegates, the mestiza power, which was an amazing event. And subsequently to that, we we moved mestiza power to Washington, DC, to the Native American Museum there. And so any thought memories? It was a lot. But yes, I'll try my best to just say that in Spanish. Te están preguntando Conchi que si quieres contarnos un poco de tus experiencias de vuelta en 2006 cuando Mark y Liz estaban de visita en México y también fueron a ver la presentación de mestiza power que en la que colaboraste con Silvia. Si no recuerdo mucho por qué ha pasado mucho tiempo y afortunadamente para eso hacemos teatro como para ir recuperando la memoria. Lo que recuerdo es que siempre me asombra que gente de otro país haya se conecte con una obra como mestiza power que es localista, que es como muy de una región muy particular y que gente de otro país se interese o se conecte con la historia me parecía como siempre me ha parecido como algo muy increíble prácticamente. Y lo que recuerdo de Mark, Lisa, es que eran muy efusivos y muy como como divertidos. Y si recuerdo que fuimos a Washington junto con otros ramaturgos y ahí leyeron la obra entre muchas mujeres y eso fue muy emocionante para mí. So Mark, I'll let you know what Conchi said. She said that it was very impressive to her to see that when people come from out of the country, they're always very impressed on how theater happens. Conchi, I think that for this one panel, it would be a great idea if everybody connects to our web switcher pro with the token that is on for the panelists in our chat for everyone else on our virtual hub. So you can you can speak on your own languages and we will all be able to understand and then that way things will be smoother. Conchi, Sylvia, si gustan descargar la aplicación web switcher pro y agregar el token que les dejen el chat, van a poder escuchar en sus idiomas a todo lo que digamos en el panel para que las cosas vayan más sencillas. OK. But please continue, I'll just pop out. Mark, do you, Mark, do you want to go on? Yes, I don't know how to do the web switcher pro, but I'll continue. So Sylvia, do you want to go ahead? Yes, I don't know. Sabina has already arrived. Maybe she would like to, hola, Sabina, maybe would like to take it from here and then I'll participate if I don't know what you think, Mark. Oh, is Sabina with us now? Sabina with us now? Oh, yes, here. Hello, Sabina, please then. Yes, Sabina. Hello, nice to say hello to everybody. See you again, Sabina. Can we just maybe Sylvia, because Sabina you just entered. Sabina, would you, Sabina, would you like to talk about your memories of that, of our getting together initially and with Victor Hugo, Roscoe and Banda, you're putting together that dinner party for us that with Liz and everything that eventually led to the port of our having that Puerto del America's festival event. That's right. Well, my my memories are a bit blurred because that happened 20 years ago, 23 years ago, something like that. But what I do remember is that you, Mark, we were talking, I'm not sure where, but we were talking about Mexican theater. And as Conchi says, it's always a good news to know that outside of Mexico, people are interested in our theater. And you told me you were really interested to meet not a few more, but many more Mexican playwrights. And I got really excited because you use the word globalization. In that time, globalization as a word started to sound around the globe and some months before the UNESCO, the UNESCO, the section of the UN organization had asked me to write about globalization and culture. And I wrote an essay saying I had few hopes and that I thought the so-called globalization was an elfemism to continue the cultural imperialism of North America. And the they included my essay in a book in which other writers wrote about the situation in Africa, in Australia, in Asia, in Latin America. And they they all said something very similar. The book started with my essay because it was the one which stated it very bluntly and from the title itself. I remember the title was Globalization as an Elfemism for Imperialism. Well, of course, we were not very happy that that was happening. And we were very pessimistic with time. We saw that it was a well-founded pessimism, although later with the Internet, certainly a globalization has started to happen. Well, you asked to ask me to introduce you to me, playwrights, not only Carvalho, which you already knew, and not only our way, yes, not only leñero, we were the generation of my teachers. So the first thing I did was introduce you to Rascon Banda. Victor Hugo was then the president of the Sochem, the organization, the union of playwrights, really. And he was very kind and he was very accessible. I know you will tell us how much he helped to organize what happened later. And I myself organized a reunion at my home, at my apartment for you, at least, that came to Mexico to meet these very new writers for you. They were unknown for you. So what happened is more than the ones that were invited came. I remember there was no place to sit. Everybody was cramped in the sofas. They were like three sofas and many chairs. And still we were very, they were very, very many people. And we drank wine and we talked and each introduced herself or herself. And then at four o'clock in the morning, three guys were there talking about theater. And I didn't know how to how to invite them to say good night. And they didn't. They stayed for breakfast. I remember that Carcamo, which I would later direct he as a actor, me as a director, was there. That's where I met him. And I know a lot of exciting things happen from there on. But I think it's for you and Liz Mark to tell that story. Thank you. So it was a very special moment. It was a very special moment. So Sylvia, I think could could you pick up from there because you were very key in moving it forward to the Porta del America's Festival and also being helping us make a strong connection to Conchi Leon. And you also were a translator of Miss Disa Power. So why don't you be a bridge for us? Please Sylvia to share your memory. Thank you. Thank you, Mark. I am very pleased to be here. And I thank all of the LMDA and all the organization, Brenda and all the people here at this conference.  If I had another chance to leave, I might be an engineer because I love to build bridges. So I just said the word bridge. And that's what I like. I have done that very frequently as a playwright because I don't think I have time to become a real engineer, but I do this kind of bridge. I fostered, for example, a grant for Mexican playwrights at the Larg Theory Development, used to be the Larg Theory Development Company from 2003 to 2006. And then during five years I connected producers from all Latin America and Spain. And of course this special relationship with LMDA. So yes, Victor Hugo Rascón that was mentioned by Savina, that I'm very pleased to see here here, was a very kind person, very generous. I miss him here because he passed away some years ago. And we miss him in the Mexican theater. And in 2006, I was close to him in Sohem and he asked me to plan and coordinate the visit of some of the LMDA dramaturgs. And as you said, 10 delegates came. And so I was thinking how could I make this visit more productive. And I imagined a place where people could come around and talk with different people. You could come around and talk with different people. And so I invited around 25 more or less Mexican or more. I think there were more Mexican directors and playwrights companies. I remember among them, Claudio Valdez Cudi, Conchileón of course. And many, many, many playwrights and directors. So I designed a gathering between LMDA dramaturgs. And I approached Marius Pinoza who was directing Fonca, the National Fund for Arts, and Puerta de las Américas Festival that was in Fonca umbrella. So at the occasion, I had the pleasure to meet Brian Quick, who was former president at the time. I think he was the president of LMDA, this Engelman to and you, Mark Bly. And from this meeting, some very interesting relationships continue to develop. In 2007, I was invited to participate at the LMDA conference in Toronto. And in 2008, I was a guest speaker at the LMDA San Diego conference in both talking of Mexican theater and my work as a playwright. Because I have the sensation that some of the Mexican playwrights are not known in the U.S. and Canada or also in Latin America. Always the same names pop. So I tried to make connections in that way too. And as a rich person, also in 2006, I connected Conchileón and her powerful play, Mestiza Power, with you, Mark Bly, as a dramaturg. I invited some of you, but you were interested in taking the play to the U.S. so I translated it. It was a very interesting trip, Conchileón, because it is written in Spanish, but it's in Mayan too. I mean, it's the way people in Maria talk that I love. So it was a very pleasurable translation. And as I know, it was taken to the Native American Museum in Washington. And time has passed by 20 years, as you said, and the relationships and exchanges have continued and have grown in 2019. Brian Kirt invited me to the Banff Playwrights Lab, where I worked in my play, and Room to Happiness. So in 2020 also, but the pandemic canceled the lab. And now in 2021, I had the pleasure to be part of the panel, the creative process at home and away in the online lab. And so after going to Canada in 2019, just before the burst of the pandemic, I built a bridge from Toronto now, from Toronto to Mexico City, when Brian Kirt came to dictate a workshop on dramaturgy at the FITU Festival in Manu, which is a festival, international festival of theater, university theater. So I'm very happy to be reunited with you again to give account of the ongoing relationships in the art and the theater world. They say that I want to finish my collaborative participation with these thoughts. They say that one remembers instance, so that's why we forget the whole picture. But these little brilliant moments are the memories. So when I think of LMDA, I think of a happy exchange. And I want to share with you an instant of this time.  If you close your eyes and then enter a big room, where there are display, five round tables, like for a party, with 10 people sat in each. We hear different languages. We hear murmuring. They are directors, playwrights and dramaturgs. We can hear them talk about their work and projects, trying to connect with each other and to connect with the visitors. And then I see, I think Mark says, they are trying to be polite. Well, we Mexicans tend to be polite. But if you talk more as you did, you will find who we are. And then I can see the future. When I looked at that room and all these people talking and sharing, I can see the future, which is now taking us to share this moment. So now you can open your eyes. Thank you. That was a wonderful bridge-building moment and a wonderful weaving of the past, present and future simultaneously, Sylvia. Thank you so much. You spoke of Brian. Perhaps we will ask Brian to share some of his memories as well. Brian Quirk. Thanks so much, Mark. Sylvia, great to be back in a room with you. Today, Liz, also lovely to see you. Sabina and Conchi, thank you for joining us. And I'm currently the board chair. I was the president of LMDA at the time and made the journey to Mexico City 15 years ago. And now I'm the board chair. And on behalf of the LMDA board and executive, I want to welcome all of you to this year's virtual LMDA conference and also everyone who's watching. I want to welcome you to this two days of conference here. And the conference that will pick up in person in Mexico City in two weeks. So a huge welcome to all of you and a thank you to Brenda and her team for getting us here today. I live in Toronto as Sylvia has beautifully introduced me. So thank you. I live in Toronto. Originally known as Dr. Ronto. And the ancestral caretakers and storytellers of these territories are the Mississaugas of the credit, the Haudenosaunee, the Anishinaabe and the Wendat Nations. And I want to be sure to acknowledge and recognize the original peoples of this land and of the lands that you are currently living and working on as well and offer our thoughts to them today. When I was thinking back on 2006 and the adventure in Mexico City, it was my first trip to Mexico City. But I also wanted to ask two of the other people who are on our exchange, then Madeleine Oldham, who is now the dramaturg at the Berkeley Rap in California, and Vanessa Portes, who was a Canadian dramaturg and artistic director. And I invited both of them to send me a highlighter too. So I'm going to share those because they sort of broaden the picture just slightly. Madeleine, like me, said she fell in love with Mexico City. It was her first visit too. And I think you can't underestimate the power of that memory. So I'm going to start with a few days that we spent there for those of us who are arriving for the first time. And while that is perhaps less relevant to the theater experience, our eyes were open to a remarkable city. And Madeleine certainly expressed that. And Madeleine's other. Most powerful memory. And she apologized that it was also not theater related, but was a concert we went to as part of the festival one of the evenings of the Norte collective. And it was extremely vividly. It was a fantastic concert in a beautiful venue. It was really an amazing night. And for those of you not familiar with the Norte collective, I'm going to put a link up in the chat. If I can. And the, I don't know if that's gone through. Anyway. Norte collective worth looking up. And then Vanessa, I asked her and she said, her highlights included us all seeing Sabina's adaptation of the Norte collective. So the. Backpacks in her pocket. I saw some of the comments on the pockets. Which Vanessa called a breathtaking and audacious political statement of cultural resistance. And I think that's a wonderful and powerful way of capturing what we witnessed that night. Vanessa also mentioned the tour that Sylvia offered. Sylvia's wonderful neighborhood in. In Mexico city. And the, the canal tour that. So I'm sorry to have missed that last year of Sylvia, so I'll take a rain check on that. And yes, exactly. Thank you. And then finally, Vanessa also called her time in Mexico City and a visit she and I did to the Anthropology Museum as, you know, huge highlights for us and called it the city of a world wonder and I would certainly concur. For me, meeting Sylvia was one of the highlights and for all the reasons that Sylvia outlined that we have managed to sustain and build a partnership and a relationship over many years with a big gap in the middle and which I think speaks to the challenge of sustaining these relationships that work across borders and across distance. How do we sustain them? How do we make them meaningful? How can we find other ways to invite one another to each other's programs, countries? Where do we find the funds to do that? How do we make them real? How do we sustain them? That is the huge work and I don't have the answers and for 10 years I didn't have the answer because Sylvia and I didn't meet for almost 10 years. But here we are back again and connected it through the Banff Playwrights Lab. I also love meeting Boris Strohman from Theatre La Capilla who I was able to meet again last year and again, a not a deep connection but a long lasting one and one that has we've these years about playwrights and about translations. The other two things that I wanted to flag were that huge gathering of Mexican playwrights and directors and our delegation. The thing that I walked away from was a huge and sudden awareness of the scope of Mexican playwriting and storytelling and my realization of how little aware I was of it and that is entirely my ignorance but that's exactly why I wanted to be there. It reminded me, it told me and introduced me to artists telling stories from across Mexico particularly from the borderlands in the north and their vantage point was particularly vivid of course as we all deal with borders particularly that border but the border between Canada and Mexico of course has this huge thing in the middle and it is a huge barrier between the exchange between Canada and Mexico and Canadian artists and Mexican artists so the vantage point that those artists offered me opened my eyes to the breadth and beauty of American or of Mexican playwriting so thank you to Sylvia and others for organizing that it made a huge difference and reminded me of how little I knew about the scene there and then the last two things the enormous number of Mexican theaters in in the city I was not aware of the again the breadth of the theater making world in Mexico City and this trip illuminated that for me in the way that only being on the ground in a place can actually make it real and that invited me into in a very small way into the ecology of that place the theater ecology of it and I walked away only knowing a little bit and I learned a little bit more when I was there last year with Sylvia I don't know nearly enough but it made it real and it and it proved yet again the value of being somewhere and and our digital contact and connection is invaluable allows us to do something like we're doing today the being there obviously we know this makes the difference so how do we sustain those how do we make them happen how do we find the funding and the opportunities for us to be in each other's landscapes on each other's territories that is what I walked away with and have worked a lot on over the last 15 years so it has inspired a lot of my own work of trying to connect with artists in other countries yeah others beyond Mexico and so thank you for the the fuel that that visit to Mexico City offered 15 years ago thank you Brian there's there's so much there here hypothetically I don't want this to be lost I think it was Sylvia who mentioned this while we were there I we always I think this is common to so many fields we always want to be first and that's just in human nature perhaps while we were there back in 2004 2006 and we were in search of that creature drometer we were looking for drometers we were looking for some kind of correspondence there and as Brian I think so in such an elegant articulate way has shared we discovered so many other universes so many theaters so many playwrights so many playwrights from so many areas outside of Mexico and it was so eye opening and so many sensory opening beyond the eyes and while we were there again this is factory there's there's not always a first while we were there other colleagues from the United States the extraordinary artist John Eisner artistic director of the Lark theater company and Andrea Heber colleague of his they were also there at the Porto de la America's festival they were also there looking meeting artists and they over the last 15 16 years have had the occasion to develop many connections many artists many relationships I know Sabina for example has had readings and worked on there they have continued to sustain many relationships which is wonderful and we remiss that I did not acknowledge that yes we were there but we haven't always been able to do that Brian's right we need to continue to make these connections continue to sustain them maybe this is a another wake-up call for that so thank you for mentioning that right all right uh Liz please share your memories hi everybody um still the future that you imagined with her 15 years ago in that room with our eyes closed we're now here um and Sabina I promise you we will not have this conversation until four in the morning but I wish there was some wine um that was it was a beautiful evening and I just want to say I don't want to repeat anything you've said already but I want to underscore the importance of relationships I feel like all of this began because of relationships um you know and as Mark said with curiosity you know two people having having curiosity having interests and then based on those relationships look who we were able to um bring into our circle and then the expanse and scale of what we were able to witness as you said um Brian and Mark you know it started with relationships and then we we learned really not only about dramaturgs in Mexico it was less about that it was about um how um what theater making what the theater culture what um what our cultures um both had um as differences and find some things in common but it was really more of for me about the spark that for me conversation and questioning which is the heart of drama energy led us to which was conversations with more people in bigger rooms um and then to um concerts and these the productions extras and the seeds of power that you've all referenced and that continued and these relationships that have continued so for me it was really mostly about um the importance of of just starting um and reaching out and then just to say um what I valued so much was just an opportunity to have a conversation about playwriting um about theater making and in a different culture we so at that point I felt um we were so rarely doing that um the opportunities you know didn't arise or we hadn't sought them in intentional ways and so the joy of really just beginning and sharing those conversations and talking about both theater making and dramaturgy and those intersections um was joyful and powerful and then also really figuring out and this is going to be the bridge I'm going to be the soviet bridge next part of our conversation about the present but really feeling like what I was getting from the the playwrights in mexico city in those days was this idea that um publication of plays was almost as important in some ways as productions of plays in terms of exposure of work across a big country um and really that felt different from playwright experiences in the united states at the time it was less about our playwrights having our having plays published and more about where will those plays get produced and so the conversation around the importance of of translation and dissemination of work was really eye-opening for me that it was actually through um through a tangible book and we left as mark has eloquently written in another article we left with like so many um so books and cds like like this is the way to show and share plays you know in lieu of production in some ways and at the time I felt where we may have where we couldn't help in the way in 2006 as I think maybe we're in a better position now in both LMDAs and organization as a field as a whole is at the time we didn't have a lot of Latinx drama terms in the LMDA fold at the time and really in the in the field to be able to help with that translation from from the from the US side of the border in order to really try to you know we had the books and then what can we do now and I feel like 15 16 years later that's that's changed in both the door in our organization and that were were way better poised in terms of the diversity um organization and the languages our drama terms and playwrights now speak um and communicate that there's possibly more connection and collaboration years later than there was then and that excites me because I felt like there was a potential and a ball that was kind of dropped by the lack of diversity on our side um in our field so that's my segue into saying what you remember at that time and how theater was being made at that time in 2006 the the evolution of theater making not you don't have to speak of course on behalf of the whole country but in your own theater making as artists um in the world directors playwrights producers what has changed where do you feel like you have seen your play making and you and your country's theater making going and anybody I you jumped so okay I Sabina how would you how might you answer that in terms of evolution yeah at least could you repeat it your your statement yes sure um we were there at a very particular time um in 2006 you were making theater in a certain way your collaborators were making a certain kind of theater in terms of what content style form now in and 2021 we're in a different place you're in a different place and wondering what you have seen in your work and others as an evolution in terms of how theater is being made um in your circles right right well in Mexico it's a very lively scene our Mexican theater when I started um writing for the theater I was called the Mexican woman that writes for the theater in my generation I was very lonely as as a woman nowadays half of the playwrights are women half of the directors are women that thing the coming to the scene of women is very important in Mexico also we have a less Mexico city center theater which is very good Conchi is one of the maybe she's the most brilliant example of of the coming of the corners of the country to the center and the spreading around the country so Mexico Mexico is doing very well theater wise now what is the relation of Mexico to the global scene we in my case I'm not a critic of theater so I'm not very sure of what is happening globally but I know that I'm opening plays all around make a Latin America my latest play has been staged in 13 countries including Brazil but we think of ourselves still as a world apart from them from the English speaking world or at least that's what I feel Netflix and the other apps have integrated many playwrights to their work and that is that is very important in the sense that yes we're crossing the geographic lines very easily but I'm still surprised that it's not that the dialogue with the North America is not more fluid it's really surprising because we are neighbors it seems that the real Bravo a which you call the Rio Grande very very eloquent we call it the Rio Bravo the brave river and you call it the Rio Grande pick maybe it's wishful thinking from its side it's still very white I think that's a very important subject why is it so why it's not more fluid in last week I'm talking with the HBO about the a story I'm adapting a book I'm adapting for them for HBO international and I ask so in what language should it be and they said you write in Spanish and I said okay but there are parts in LA a third part of the book happens in North America they said oh that's in English okay and they told me but you know this guy you have that's an Australian CEO we want him to be Spanish and he said it makes a lot of sense okay but in what language do I write and they told me again writing whatever you want anyway it's going to be translated doblaje how do you say that in English it's going to actors are going to talk over it doblaje and that fluidity with I wish we could get to that in the theater because still theater is like the the essence of drama you cannot compare theater to movies or to Netflix it's not the same it's a it's the theater where the playwrights and the actor are completely alive and it's the essence it's that's the the most antique art and it's also the most present in the two sense of the the the word present so I wish yes we could talk more of why it's not more fluid than what can we make to make it more fluid this interchange across El Rio Grande or El Rio Bravo thank you Sabina and that's a that's a great question to tee up I think for the conference over these couple days and then also in Mexico City to to see if we can find answers to that question of how we can bravely cross that big brave river and have and have more collaborations as as we all want to do and I'm I'm curious Sylvia your answer to that question or add some more questions of your own in terms of where you sit today with your theater making and how you see you work in Mexico having evolved and if you have any answers to Sabina's question I'd love to hear that too well no no no answers their questions are very important for our theater and I agree with her in in many senses no so no answers no I have questions too the same and others no because I think I have I was reading for other reasons a book called cultural code and it's very interesting because it's written for marketing but there are very subtle cultural codes that are part of these questions I mean it's not only the language but it's how as you as you were saying Liz how do we conceive theater in every country in every region and I found in the in North in Canada I know less I am not very familiar with that but in the U.S. the parcels by the origins or the ethnic you you'll be belong to it's very strong and I have found that very weird very strange I have like how can I do that because yes you are translated and you are read or you get a production or something but the the the the the judgment is there I wrote a play about Sylvia Plath and Ted Hughes in Spanish I love those poets and that's why I wrote about them and I was questioned in the U.S. why you being a Mexican not being American not being able to write about well I said because I can because I want and I can because in Mexico then that that's what I love here in here you can write about anything you want about any subject any person any character any and I love that and I think that has led us to enrich our playwriting we have we and also I what I found I find different now from the 2006 theater is this this a lot of playwrights and directors and actors from all over the country in Mexico are moving around now with the pandemic it has stopped a little bad moving around I mean the mobility that we have now in in in Mexico and all the nation is big for example country as Savina said is adhering in many places but also the place the productions travel in Mexico a lot and also we travel abroad and that's very very important that before it was less no so the mobility around the world I think has also is a difference thank you in my I see yeah sorry ah yeah thank you conchi thank you conchi nice to see you yeah so good to see you she's right as I was going to ask her a question it sounds like I just to say not to speak for conchi but I'm just wondering you know you both you both referenced moving around the country much more now and and Sabina you mentioned conchi being her and her plays and her working everywhere um uh if there's anything you might like to add in terms of the work that she's been making recently or maybe what she's working on just to give a we didn't get to hear from her as much to maybe say a little bit about what she might be doing that's been so powerful in the country well in Mexico we have a modification of the Indian as in many places and conchi just started to do this place that are happening in this what we call the Indian part of the country which is she first first the thing she told us is not Indian it's mestizo so stop talking about us as Indian we are mestizos just as you are next development is start talking about us like if we were living in another century we're not we're in the same century we see tv we have iphones so stop doing that but yes we're different we're still different in yucatan we dress different we eat different we have a different humor and wow we're feminists too and that that is so refreshing and i she's been very successful because of that because you go and see her place and a new world which is not really completely different than ours opens up with a lot of authenticity she doesn't play for the to the audience she's just authentic and so she's been very successful and she's a very good playwright i haven't said that because all that is like very nice and good but she's very effective on stage thank you mark um that is is i had a quick question of for sabina and sylvia is mestiza powered still done performed a lot i don't know i i saw it in the teatro elenico and i laughed it then i invited the conchi to work with me because she's a wonderful actress or actor no in english you say she's a wonderful actor she's a wonderful actor too so i don't know sylvia i remember well um yeah thank you i think i was you were going to to talk um yes i think sabina is still somewhere playing from time to time but conchi now has a play also with mayan traditions about baptism i have not seen that play but i think it's very interesting and also she has this work about biographical play that is um wonderful monologue very long done by hair yeah very deep and then that was now with the evolution of theater on the screens for the screens i saw that at adoption and adaptation for soon and it was very good also for the screen very very well adapted very well performed and so that i think that sylvia is still from time to time here or there mm-hmm so aha del manantial del corazón yes ah yes ryan thank you yeah well no i i remember seeing it and it was it was uh it it operated it had such power and operated on so many different levels in terms of the the daily rites of the mayan uh women and and on this whole other level i kept remembering the sensory power of it uh you know there's there's there's the play there's the language extraordinary acting there was also the sensory dimension of it as well uh of of the washing of the hair and all of that and the smell it was it was just a profoundly theatrical she's an extraordinary artist i know we need to switch to the q and a at this point thank you everyone for your your extraordinary contributions uh wonderful uh at a 15-year distance at a 15-year mirror not that is never easy uh you're you've been very kind to share and to stay with us in in this way uh and and the audience as well all very kind to listen uh so uh i know uh amanda and jay have been collecting questions that they will feel and share with us please hello my name is jay i'm one of the volunteers for lndia conference um so we have one question from martin k green rogers what do you think is the future of collaborations across the borders with time money and other things being a potential obstacle i'm going to repeat one more time what do you think is the future of collaboration across borders with time money and other things being a potential obstacle well if time but if time money and other things are the obstacle we're very far away they should be time money and other things should be vehicles when when something it can happen very easily that's what i think and yeah i just like to add that our next panel in fact addresses i will probably address some of those issues in terms of mexico and canada and the dramaturgical collaborations between the two countries which are are small and very modest at the moment um because as i said earlier the the gap between um the canadian border and and the mexican border is is indeed is grand and has so many obstacles in it and has been very hard to surmount uh at all i think i would say that there are there are more connections and contacts internationally for pertaining artists now than there ever have been um not as many not nearly as many of those are uh links to um mexico or central and south america and that is a huge absence in the work here um not only the collaborations but um the presence of of productions of work by any artists by if almost any of those countries are almost completely absent in canada which goes down to the the the timidity of our producers and theaters largely and also the the the conviction by canadian artists over the last 30 years to to produce canadian work um in the face of let's be honest the the huge amount of british and american work that was on our stages so we are still dealing with that and more currently about prioritizing work by indigenous artists from these these lands uh and from uh um uh diverse artists from so many places that that live and work in canada all of those are realistic barriers unfortunately to to seeing more work by mexican and central american artists on our stages i would like to add something i i had an experience at calgary they called me and they said they want to stage between pancho villan and naked woman and i said really at calgary okay fine great so they stage it i go there and i'm surprised i'm still surprised why are they doing this and they're producers and they have a big big theater first night it's completely full and then i understand half of the theater the less expensive tickets all were mexicans calgary receives so many many work temporary workers every year so that was the public and the other public were those canadians that were had the necessity to understand from where these guys were coming so i've found that very intelligent producing i thought the producer was very intelligent and he was very successful that dimension there there are millions of immigrants from our countries one way to the other that's something i i i don't know if it's taking in the producer or watching this phenomenon also to martin's question yeah to martin's question i also wonder if there's a pandemic silver lining in some of this too in terms of now these conversations that are happening as we're having now with technology that we're able to meet to be introduced to see work across all borders if you have access to technology that we're able to to collaborate new ways or find each other in new ways or continue connections in new ways that we couldn't win with the expensive travel or when we weren't able to travel or so i i wonder in terms of time and and money and other things martin if maybe somehow what you learned through this last year can connect us each other to wider wider circle of collaborators to start new projects yeah we've got another question i'd love for us to get to before we finish i'm a man i'm a man of the volunteers um considering you got to see a dream as great as this reunion come true what does everyone in this gathering wish for when you think of the future silvia you should close your eyes and dream what you see well now i i think um well for me it's important that the future brings more theater i mean now that with the pandemic that the theaters are closed and we are beginning to to come back for me the nearest future i hope we have theaters full of people as in category you know it's uh what i wish for but i think coming to the from the other question too i would like to say that festivals are a huge bridge to make that place circulate so if uh there will be more festivals that bring mexican place to canada and to other countries so i would like to see a future with more bridges but not not only individual or group little groups but huge like maybe festivals i think it's not easy to to develop a festival but it's a way to make place uh move around you know and and yes i see i am optimistic so let's have more theater right we have one minute left we have time for perhaps one well i we have time for one question uh anyone want to jump in with a uh a last minute comment or um i think this has been a terrific event but um i wanted to say one last thing uh this is a whole question about the future i think uh you know i started off from this place of that we had curiosity uh what do i want in the future well i want us i want us to get to a place where we we of course we always have curiosity we must have curiosity someone just said i think it was uh silvia we need more festivals when you think about 15 16 years ago uh my god this the borders and walls the digital what it what it has done unfortunately has broken down so many walls and the whole notion of i have seen probably 50 60 productions in the last year or two that i would never have seen i just simply would not have seen unfortunately i have seen i've seen them now and uh and will have seen festivals and everything uh it's it it's incredible what's happened and so my curiosity continues to happen uh it will always happen and uh that's our greatest train as artists this curiosity we must never let that die thank you so much everyone thank you uh out there who watched us listen to us you've been we're grateful to you all thank you so much thank you so much for the conversation it was really nice to see you again yes thank you so much thank you all it's a wonderful reunion Silvia Sabina thank you Brenda colleagues Brian and Conchi who left early thank you for a great panel um and everyone we will be seeing you very soon in 15 minutes for the Canadian Mexican artist exchange thank you very much for joining us thank you hi thank you all thank you thank you nice to see you oh Silvia we will come and see you soon


We definitely wait for birthdays or even an ice cream, like my daughter has to earn it. Yesterday we promised her an ice cream, but then she behaved horribly and I said, then I'm sorry ice cream is for girls who behave, and that's not you today. We tomorrow. Rachel Sherman, uneasy street, the anxieties of affluence. Part one. One. That night when Mrs. Chamberlain called, Emira could only piece together the words, take Briar somewhere and pay you double. In a crowded apartment and across from someone screaming, that's my song, Emira stood next to her girlfriends, Zara, Josepha, and Shawnee. It was a Saturday night in September, and there was a little over an hour left of Shawnee's 26th birthday. Emira turned the volume up on her phone and asked Mrs. Chamberlain to say it again. Is there any way you can take Briar to the grocery store for a bit? Mrs. Chamberlain said, I'm so sorry to call, I know it's late. It was almost astonishing that Emira's daily babysitting job, a place of pricey onesies, colorful stacking toys, baby wipes, and section dinner plates, could interrupt her current nighttime state, loud music, body con dresses, lip liner, and red solo cups. But here was Mrs. Chamberlain at 10.51 p.m., waiting for Emira to say yes. After the veil of two strong mixed drinks, the intersection of these spaces almost seemed funny. But what wasn't funny was Emira's current bank balance, a total of $79.16. After a night of $20 entrees, birthday shots, and collective gifts for the birthday girl, Emira Tucker could really use the cash. Hang on, she said.  You want me to take Briar right now? On the other side of the table, Shawnee placed her head on Josepha's shoulder and slurred. Does this mean I'm old now? Is 26 old? Josepha pushed her off and said, Shawnee, don't start. Next to Emira, Zara untwisted her bra strap. She- Sample complete. Ready to continue?


Everybody forced here ripping the sports card Almanac multi-sport personal box edition of volume 4 one box for Henry H box number 16 Number 16. Good luck Henry. Thank you You do appreciate it. What is this? It's a book maybe I? Believe it is It is a book oh You go Henry Wow Wow 2021 playbook football Justin Fields rookie dual memorabilia book jumbo swoosh and full laundry tag two out of two Henry congrats on that That'll look good. You gotta get a display for that one. That's nice jumbo laundry tag and full swoosh That is nice. Yeah, it's got acetate around the frame in there Two of two fields congrats Henry. Thank you


You have said that Americans were so much more individualistic back then. Yeah, there was definitely, Americans were definitely, you know, it was this real struggle within America, I think, in the 19th century. On the one hand there was this strong element of individualism, but it was bounded within certain groups. And I think it's a sad feature of America, but as America matured, it got rid of that. So, certainly a lot of Americans were now racist in the North, and that's why they were willing to fight a war to stop enslavement. But if you think about racism in a broader sense, think about the hatred of the Irish for the Italians, and the hatred of the Italians for the Irish, and the hatred of both of those for Jews, and the gang wars that happened in New York, and so on between the different ethnic groups, or between the different nationalities. And over time that went away and people became less and less. What American fused them with ultimately is the individualism. And the spirit of individualism is in the founding of this country, and in the spirit and the culture of this country. And in that sense, the South with the slavery and racism was anti-American, anti-founding fathers, and I'm going to have Brad Thompson on the show on Saturday to talk a little bit about that. We talked about it when we talked about his book. But the South was very European and very racist, and that somehow racism, there was always this tension, always this conflict between individualism, inherent in the founding of the country, and the racism that was part of the founding of the country. And that continued through the 19th century, and to some extent continues today. Yeah, Alex, I just picked this up off of Alex. It's nicely put. IQ measures a particular set of cognitive abilities.  It just measures proficiency at specific mental exercises. Absolutely. And then there's the whole issue of wisdom. Intelligence should not be confused with wisdom. There's a whole spectrum of even what intelligent constitutes, and it constitutes more than what IQ measures. All right, finally, oh my God, we've got immigration now. How are we going to do immigration? I don't know how we do immigration. By the way, one of the things that got me angry about this racism thing and why I brought it up today, I was doing this thing, I told you about the monkeys, this thing for a group of Israelis. And one of the people listening in was a guy from Hungary. I think Jewish guy from Hungary. And in the Q&A, he starts advocating for racism. He's Jewish. And what he's arguing for is the superiority of Ashkenazi Jews. Wow. Do you consider pick up a racist thinking back to what was said in the debate with the two of you in immigration? Absolutely not. And nothing he said during that debate, nothing he said during that debate would constitute racism. Racism, you can have objections to immigration that are not racist. And his objections were not racist. So no, no, and I, you know, Leonard is a good friend and my mentor and my teacher and no, absolutely not. Okay, so let me just say, and that blew my mind, a Jewish racist who thinks everybody else is beneath him. You think Jews would know better. You think, all right. Immigration. So there are a lot of objections to immigration. There are a lot of objections to immigration. I don't think any of them stand up to the facts. And I don't think, I don't think any of them, I think, but some of them are more reasonable than others. I do think, however, that much of the objections to immigration comes from racism. That's kind of the theme. It comes from xenophobia. It comes from the dislike of those who look differently than us. There's very little discussion of immigration from Europe. There's very little discussion, disagreement about European immigrants. And this has been true, again, for a very long time. The first anti-immigration bill was passed in the 19th century, in the late 19th century, 1890s, to specifically exclude Chinese. And then later on, immigration bills tried to exclude Southern Europeans, including Jews. And later on in the 60s, when it was recognized that past immigration bills were pro-European anti-other nationalities, the 1960s immigration bill tried to balance it out by swaying more favorably towards, let's say, Hispanics. People come from Latin America. But our immigration policies have always been influenced by race. They've always been racist, and there's no question in my mind that our immigration policies today are that those, not everybody, but those many people who want to restrict immigration are motivated by racial issues. And the loudest voices against immigration are the voices of the racists. They don't want people who look differently than them in this country. Now, I've said what I've said about racism, so I think that's enough. I won't talk more about it. I think that's a despicable, disgusting reason. I'm not saying that Americans are racist. I'm saying that a lot, because I don't think all Americans are anti-immigration, but I think a lot of the anti-immigration people are anti-immigration because they don't like to see a bunch of brown people cross the border. And then they're much more favorable towards Europeans coming, if they're coming illegally. Much more favorable to illegal European immigrants. And a lot of them, by the way, a lot of them, they just do it differently. Most illegal immigrants in the United States. This is a fact. You can check it out. You can check it out in the government websites. Most illegal immigrants in the United States come here with a legal visa and overstay their visa. They overstay their visa. It's not true that most illegal immigrants cross the border at night, smuggled in. Now, there are other objections to immigration. To, you know, more immigration, open immigration. One is the economy. It will hurt the economy. How? It'll take jobs from Americans. So first, let's separate out jobs from the economy. There is no case, economic case, right? No more super chat questions unless, unless they are on the issue of immigration. I don't want to see anything else because I'm not going to answer it. There's just not enough time. And I know people disagree with their immigration, so ask away. Ask me about all the things you've been wanting to ask me, Israel and Muslims and all that stuff. Ask me. Now is your chance. There is no basis for an argument that immigration hurts the economy. From a purely economic perspective, GDP, growth, innovation, economic growth, economic success. Immigration is a huge plus. Immigration is a huge benefit to the economy. Massive.  More immigrants is more minds thinking about more problems, solving more problems, consuming more goods, but more importantly, producing more goods. Creating more jobs. But what about the jobs of Americans? Oh my God, we need to protect those poor Americans. And does immigration lower wages? No. Not in the long run. It doesn't a short run for particular jobs. But in the long run, it doesn't. Almost all studies show that in the long run, wages don't move much when you have lots of immigrants. Well, here that, you know, we got more racists. Here's a good example, right? More Somali minds. Well, one of the most brilliant women I know.  Her name is Ayan Hussi Ali. She's one of the bravest, smartest, most courageous woman you will ever meet. So yeah, you can latch on to the Somali label and pretend that that means anything.  Yeah, she's Somali.  We need more Somali minds. Absolutely. No, she's married. She's married to another amazing guy. Nile Ferguson, who is a historian and a really good thinker. I don't agree with him on everything. I don't agree with Ayan Hussi Ali on everything. And he's an immigrant to the United States. He happens to have immigrated here from the United Kingdom. He's white. She's black. How does that fit into some of your worldview? I'm not sure. Both immigrants, and I'm married. I'm speaking for a gated community. Actually not. I live in a condominium in Puerto Rico. What gated community? See, these are the kind of arguments people have against me. It's not Iran's wrong because of fact one, two, three. It's Iran lives in a gated community when I don't. I'm speaking for my condominium in Puerto Rico. All right, I'm going to do this. I think we're going to have our three-hour show today. Jobs, jobs. Long-term wages go up, not down. Long-term GDP goes up, not down. Quality of life standard of living goes up, not down. The things the immigrant produces, if their wages are lower, then costs less for you. So as a consumer, your quality of life goes up, not down. Immigrants are massive, plus. Not minus to economic success. But you say, we have a welfare state. And Milton Friedman once said, you can't have open immigration if you have a welfare state. Well, I hate to say it, but even Milton Friedman was wrong sometimes. And you can see this by asking the person who says to you, well, what about the welfare state? Say, okay, so eliminate the welfare state. Are you okay with open immigration then? And of course they're going to say no. Of course they're going to say no. So, yeah, the welfare state is problematic. I'd love to see, I'd love to see the passion, the energy of the anti-immigration people deployed to getting rid of the welfare state. I wish all those conservatives who want to stop immigration devoted the same attention, the same energy to getting rid of welfare. But they don't care about the welfare state. What they don't want is immigrants. And on top of that, immigrants are generally good for the welfare state. Because immigrants, not like Americans, not like people born in America, actually come to this country to work. They come to this country because they know what poverty looks like. And they come to this country to make a better life for themselves. So they tend to get jobs. They tend to work. They tend to pay into the welfare state and support Americans who grew up with all of this and still manage to screw up and land on the walls of welfare. Who do you think is worse? And then we're going to come here with grew up in horrible conditions and come here and maybe lands up on a welfare in America. Who grew up with this and lands up on a welfare? I resent America much more than I resent the immigrant. Alright, then there's culture. Somebody asked a question about this. Do you differentiate between racism and a conservative object into immigrants based on alleged culture degradation? Yes and no. I think there is a cultural question you can ask. I think it's often just a disguise for racism but you can ask the question. Yes, people bring their culture with them. And yes, their cultures are not as good as ours. I am not a multiculturalist. I believe our culture is better. But what conservatives ignore is, they choose to ignore, is that if our culture is so much better, which it is, why are we afraid of their bad culture? Why can't we just get them to convert to ours? And maybe the first generation more. Maybe the first generation, they'll have their culture. They'll have their music. They'll have their food. They'll have their attitudes. Maybe make a law that the first generation immigrants can never vote. But why should the second generation have that culture? If we truly believe that our culture is superior, if we truly believe that our culture is right, good, virtuous, noble, why don't we embrace them into the melting pot? Why don't we make them part of the melting pot? Why don't we teach them our culture? Well, we don't because of multiculturalism. But who invented multiculturalism? Was it immigrants or was it Americans? Who are the lefties who undermine America? Who are the lefties who teach that America is a bad country, that American culture is bad? Who? Immigrants? No, Americans. So why are you blaming the immigrants? Why don't we assimilate? Why don't we demand assimilation? Why don't we expect assimilation? I've spoken about this many times. You know, when I was sworn in as an American citizen, in 2003, George Bush was president, and he comes up on the big screen in this hall with thousands of people swearing their allegiance to America as new citizens. And he tells us we should embrace our old culture, we should teach our kids about our old culture. And what I'm thinking is, no, the reason I came to America was I don't want that old culture. Yeah, it's all about the Democratic Party.  I'm not talking about political parties. Talk about reality, facts, logic. This is George Bush, Republican, who told me to embrace my old culture, told the thousands of people in the hall with me to embrace their old culture and teach their kids about it and not forget about it. And I'm going the exact opposite. You should demand that we assimilate. But imagine a world, would you agree? We'll skip that. All right. What did I want to... Okay, so culture, I believe American culture is strong enough to integrate and assimilate any culture thrown at it. Any culture thrown at it. If we're not, then it's our problem and we should get our act together. It's time to get our act together. Finally, and this was Leonard's objection, voting. Immigrants come here and they vote Democratic. And the Democrats are turning this country into a disaster. And I think the mistake there is empirical. One, most immigrants don't vote. Very few immigrants actually vote, actually go out and vote. Second, they vote Democratic for a reason. And that is because Republicans are anti-immigrants. Violently anti-immigrants. So why would they vote for somebody who's anti-them? Third, how about we pass a law that says that first generation immigrants can't become, can't vote? Would you then allow them in? Would you then allow them in? Finally, the answer is none of the above. The answer to immigration is individual rights. The only, the only job of government is to protect rights. The only job of government is to protect us from people who would violate our rights. If somebody's coming to America to work, if somebody's coming to America to take care of their life, to take care of their kids, whatever, they're not coming here to be a criminal or a terrorist. Then how is it your business? How has the government got to say in who should come and who should not? Where's the government's role? Where's the violation of rights by somebody coming here and taking your job? If you're not a right to a job, if you've got a question on Muslim immigration, ask it. So the only role of government is to protect our rights. So it should protect us from potential criminals, terrorists coming into this country. But beyond that, why is it the government's business? There's a super chat feature. You can ask a question in a super chat feature just like everybody else. Beyond that, what is the government's responsibility?  How is that hurting my neighbor? And if I don't allow them to vote, well, voting shouldn't be able to negate rights, but it does today. But that's again not the fault of immigrants. It's the fault of Americans. They instituted those laws. So let's see if we've got some immigration questions. Do you believe your views on immigration are the most individualistic? And don't you think Latin America has a problem with collectivistic ideology? Yes, Latin America is horrifically collectivist. But the better people in Latin America, the individualists among the Latin Americans are willing to risk their lives, are willing to travel thousands of miles to come and work in the United States. Yeah, you know, this is what I used to get. Here's somebody really smart. He got on my chat and he says, your analysis is superficial, Mr. Book. Well, why? Show me where it's wrong. Show me where it's wrong. Show me where it's wrong. Don't tell me it's superficial. Show me the depth. Because I can take this very deep. I can do a three-hour show on immigration. I have answered every question anybody's ever asked me about this. I can give you facts. I can give you the empirical data. I can give you the studies. I've read the books. Where? Where is this depth that I'm missing? Show me. There's a super chat feature. You can challenge me. So it's the better people who come here. And again, it's a cultural issue. The first generation might have a difficulty with the individualistic approach. But if we have decent education in this country, if we have a decent culture in this country, they assimilate and they become more individualistic. Just like when the Irish and the Italians came to this country in the 19th century, they hated each other's guts. And over time, they assimilated. They became Americans. And the Irish didn't care that the Italian was an Italian. The Italian didn't care that the Irish was Irish. And that's the ideal. The ideal is everybody treats each other as an individual. But Latin America screwed up because of its collectivistic culture. Let's give them a way out. Let's give them an escape valve. Come to America. Thank you for fighting the racist on both sides. Taking a vacation August 1st and thinking about Puerto Rico, do you recommend? Yes, absolutely. Yeah, maybe write to me at your on at your on bookshow.com rather than take up the podcast time. What about refugees? What should be the government's role in a matter of refugees? None. The government's role should be none with regards to immigrants. Somebody wants to come here. In an ideal situation, as long as they're not a threat, then they can come. They don't get help from the American government. The American government doesn't subsidize their travel. The American government doesn't give them housing. It doesn't hand them a check. Come get a job. If you don't have a job, stop. Or get private charity. But the government should have no role in refugees in the sense of promoting them, supporting them, bringing them to the country, and so on. We're not a charity. We're not an altruistic outreach program. And because you guys worry about welfare and all these other things, I've suggested an intermediate plan without open borders, where we only accept people into the United States who have jobs. That is, they have to show that some American is willing to hire them, with no restrictions otherwise. And then they get a five-year visa, which is renewed as long as they get a job. They can never vote, but they can live in the United States as long as they have a job. How about that? That's what I proposed into a step before we get open borders. I'm still waiting for some of your challenges, but you see they're too cowardly to actually put them in bold so I can see them. They just say, oh, Iran is superficial, but where's the question? Where's the deep question? To show how superficial I am. Iran, you said it best before.   We identify the garbage for them and said, that's unacceptable in America. All right, let's see. Does immigration remain beneficial in a welfare state where incentives to change culture in line with productive values are removed? No, a welfare state is unbelievably corrupting, evil and bad. Let's fight the welfare state. There's no reason to fight immigration. Let's fight the welfare state. And my proposal about allowing anybody in with a job should reduce your concern about the welfare state because they won't need welfare because they'll have a job. So again, don't allow people in completely openly but allow anybody in who has a job. Not a job that an American won't do, but any job. Somebody's willing to hire this person for an ex-salary and let's say a living wage just so they don't get tempted by food stamps.  How about that? A living wage for them, by the way, not a living wage for an American. Ban immigrants from getting welfare for their life. There are lots of ways you can deal with a welfare issue. Make welfare illegal for immigrants. But you see, most people are not really interested in that idea because most people just don't want immigrants.  Or because they have some collectivistic reason not to want immigrants. I don't see that. Let's see. Frank asked a question about Grover Cleveland. I'm not going to answer it now. It's not on topic. I don't know the answer to your question because I don't know the details of what you're referring to. I'll research it and get back to you. What do you think about dual citizenship? Is it good, bad, and principle in practice? Does it present any problems, positives? I don't think so. I think the only time that it can present a problem is when you have dual citizenship the two countries are enemies of one another and then they should make you choose. So as long as they're allies, as long as they're generally, there's no conflict between the two countries, dual citizenship should not be a problem. It's only when they're antagonistic to one another, there's a real issue, then I think it's legitimate for them to say, you can be a citizen of the United States and the Soviet Union. We're pretty much at war here. You have to choose. Let's see, disregard my earlier question, joining late. Is there a downside to only allowing highly skilled immigrants, doctors, engineers, and not allowing immigrants to have larger... Yeah, absolutely. And that is that the jobs, the lower skilled jobs don't get done or that the cost of those lower skilled activities goes up which reduces our standard of living. It goes up artificially. So... And, you know, you're missing a lot of activity. I believe that low skilled immigrants create jobs for low skilled Americans. Yeah, you know, I'm sure lots of people who run, I don't know, businesses in California are illegal immigrants who came in low skilled, entrepreneurial, developed a business, and now some of the employees are Americans. So I think... I don't think there should be a bias for any particular type of business. It should be anybody with a job.  Well, if the immigration laws are irrational and just, why does it matter if it's illegal? Absolutely. And why aren't you advocating for rational legal immigrants' immigration which is much more open? Indeed, the opposite. The people who are against illegal immigration are always against more restrictive legal immigration laws. Do you know of an essay or other reference that compares the philosophies of Kant and Rand thanks to the high frequency of shows? Not directly, no. I mean, Ein Rand talked about Kant, but I don't know anybody who kind of third party who does that analysis. You might want to look at the companion to Ein Rand's studies that Greg Salamieri is one of the editors of. It might have something about Kant in there. Maybe, I seem to recall that Jason Rines, an objective philosopher, has an analysis of Kant versus Rand. And of course, Leonard Peacock does. I'm pretty sure in his dim hypothesis lectures, he has an analysis of Kant versus Rand. Okay, so I gave you a few sources there. What would border control's job be in an open borders? It would be to make sure the terrorists don't come in. It would make sure that enemy combatants, enemy citizens don't come in. So you could ban immigration from certain countries if they were an enemy of yours. Like you don't bring in Germans during World War II. But, so that would be their job. Make sure criminals don't come in through the border. And the other job is to make sure people carrying infectious diseases don't come in. So infectious diseases, criminals, and the third category would be enemies of the state. So terrorists, or spies, or just citizens of an enemy country. That's their job. I'll keep the question about Grover Cleveland for another time. I agree with you in immigration. My main concern is the consequence of opening the border while we have a large welfare state. I talked about that, so we've talked about that quite a bit. Do you think the fervor against immigration is driven by xenophobia? Yes, the logic degree. And by nationalism. And by false economics. The idea of zero-sum economics and the idea that I have a right to a job. So socialist economics. The whole idea of a right to a job is big. I hear it all the time on Facebook. But they'll take American jobs. There's no such thing as an American job. There's a job that an entrepreneur created. Jack writes, my dad immigrated here in the 60s. He had to be sponsored and was tested on American history. Do you think that should be done still? Yes. So, well, I think there are two different things. Two different things. I've said this. And some objectivists don't agree with me, but I think this. And this is a way, by the way, to solve the voting problem. I think it should be very, very easy to come to America and work in America. I think it should be very, very difficult to become a citizen. Citizen gives you voting rights. Citizens gives you all kinds of protections that noncitizens do not have. For that, you should really know the American system of government. You should really understand the system of values of America. Not the philosophy. Not whether you're pro or against particular points of view. But you should understand the philosophical foundations of America. In a sense of rights. Not that you agree with them necessarily. Because the government should be in the business of testing you on your ideas. It should be in the business of testing your knowledge about the country. And only people who pass that test should become citizens and vote and so on. By the way, I think we should consider having that test for natural born Americans before they vote. So maybe we can make it so that you cannot vote unless you pass the test. That would be interesting because why not have qualifications for people being able to test to vote. So I think citizenship voting is different than just living here. I think pretty much anybody should be able to live here. Few people should be able to vote. The test that they deploy now any fourth grade it could pass. It should be a serious test, a difficult test. A test that really challenged you. And that should be a test for citizenship. But not for work. I did the test. I went through the whole process. I'm an immigrant.  Uncle Gathe is Canadian. Ilangino is, I guess, Israeli, French. Yeah, a lot of Keith Lockheedge is Canadian. A lot of Canadians in Objectivism. But a lot of immigrants. John Rittbeth, of course, was, so a lot of immigrants are great for Canada. You know, the better Canadians come to America, generally.  And of course, of course, Iron Man was an immigrant. John Rittbeth never immigrated to the United States. He stayed in Canada. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning, any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect. Not by feelings, wishes, whims or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist. Using the super chat, and I noticed yesterday when I appealed for support for the show, many of you stepped forward and actually supported the show for the first time. So I'll do it again. Maybe we'll get some more today. If you like what you're hearing, if you appreciate what I'm doing, then I appreciate your support. Those of you who don't yet support the show, please take this opportunity, go to Iranbrookshow.com slash support or go to subscribestart.com, Iranbrookshow and make a kind of a monthly contribution to keep this going. I'm not sure when the next...


What's good, Josh Boros back again with another video. So we're going to check out 10 WWE wrestlers who had a more brutal alternate finisher. Now, this should be a very interesting video because sometimes alternate finishes you would think should probably be the main finisher. But we're going to check out some of these instances where wrestlers alternate finishes were better than their main finisher or came off as more devastating. Should be a very interesting one. Appreciate all the love and support you guys have shown on the channel. Let's get right into this bad boy, man. Evolution is one of the key parts in keeping a wrestler popular and relevant. Evolution can take many forms. It can take it a form of a new gimmick or persona or it can be the introduction of a brand new finishing move. This is always a risky decision to make as the new finishing move has to stand out when contrasted against the wrestlers prior finishing move for sure should always make a logical sense to the gimmick of the respective wrestler. Sometimes the new finishing move is positively received by fans and that wrestler will implement the finisher into their arsenal for the remainder of their career. However, it's also often the case that fans left confused by the finishing move and the move is quickly abandoned and the wrestler hopes that fans it raise it from their memories. Join us now as wrestling looks at 10 notable times a wrestler introduced a new finisher. Be sure to subscribe and hit that notification bell for daily wrestling videos and follow us on Facebook for exclusive lists. Also, check out our new website, wrestling.com. Let's get right into this one. Should be a good one. Number 10, Randy Orton, the punk kick. Oh, the punk kick is it's just classic and it fit his theme, bro. The voice is in his head. He was deranged and it's effective because when you really think about it, you kick someone in the head. They're done.  Oh, that she was so good, man. A new finishing move back in 2007. Oh, so good. Finishing move the RKO is without a doubt one of the most famous finishing moves ever. But Orton WWE decided to take the risk by expanding Orton's repertoire during his vastly underrated feud with Shawn Michaels. Orton introduced the punk. Oh my God, so good people in the skull and it was presented as one of the most devastating and sinister moves in WWE at the time. According to Orton during an interview with Talksport, it was a legendary on Anderson who came up with the idea. The punk kick was on Anderson's idea. I believe it was in 2007 and I was working with the heartbreak kid Shawn Michaels and I believe he was the first guy that I kicked in the head. Then it was a different time and I kicked a lot of people in the head. I talk about taking care of your opponent and I talk about how your number one priority should be making sure that you physically have your opponent's back above even having the best match on the card. It should be about taking care of each other as a first priority. So with that punk kick, it was hard. It was hard because I've got to make this thing look good, but it's kind of hard to work for lack of a better term. I kicked to the head something that devastating. Yeah, due to a strong presentation, Orton was able to get the move over and whenever Orton has hit the move in recent years, it's always received a significant ovation from the audience. Yeah, because it was protected and it looks devastating.  You do that to someone in real life. You're going to jail and they're going to definitely be in the hospital. So it just worked in once again. It fit his deranged theme like he wasn't using this finisher. He was trying to legit put you on the shelf. Love the punk kick. Number nine, Batista, Batista bite in 2000. I remember this one final few weeks in the company. He decided to introduce a new submission based finishing move. The reason for the introduction of the move was to give Batista a possible move to defeat his archrival John Cena and the question was known as the Batista bite. Despite the move being short lived, it looked fantastic as it was in essence a scissored armbar cross face and some fans compared it to the notable submission move. The rings of the satin fans will always remember the Batista bombers, Batista's primary finishing move, yet a submission based move was certainly one that had the ability to get over and connect with the audience. Well, yeah, Mark Henry slumped. Damn. Number eight, Kevin Owens, the stunner. Whenever wrestler reuses the finisher, the finisher is always going to be I had to get used to it. I definitely did have to get used to him using the stunner. I'm okay with it because I mean, I think we all Kevin Owens is so he's great. He's fantastic, but I really did have to get used to it initially. It's the original version of the move. When Kevin Owens decided to use the stunner as a finishing move, it took a considerable amount of time for fans to react positively because the stunner was synonymous with Stone Cold Steve Austin and even John Cena had a tough time in getting his variation over. While speaking to inside the ropes, Owens would discuss why he decided to adopt the move and he even revealed that he asked Austin permission before he started incorporating the move into his arsenal. So I tried to think of something new that nobody was doing and then it occurred to me that nobody was really doing the stunner and then you know I was looking at the landscape of things and everybody does a superkick. The superkick was sure Michael's his finishing move. Nobody ever used it as good as him. Nobody was using the stunner and to me, those are pretty much two of the most iconic finishes of all time. So I'm like, well, the super kicks obviously kind of spoken for the stunner is my favorite move of all time. It's a lot of people's favorite move of all time. I know the guy who used to do it. I'm going to go and ask him. So I did. He was very happy to tell me I could use it. Give me his blessing. He said, I don't know why nobody came to me sooner about it. Yeah, which is crazy. It was just finding the right time to do it. And I think it's because just out of respect because they know it's not as soon as you do it, it's not going to it's going to take fans time to really buy into it. The only reason why I work with Kevin Owens because Kevin Owens is he's more or less liked by the fan base and it took some time and is one of those things where he was able to really expound upon it when he ended up talking about Stone Cold Steve Austin and they had their few going into WrestleMania that year. But it took time for fans to actually be like, you know what? I'm okay with it. Now fans are okay with him doing it, but it took time. Anybody else that's not Kevin Owens or you know, not at that level of of Kevin Owens in the sense of being at the top of the car. Kevin Owens is mostly usually at the upper tier range in WWE and has been for a while. I don't I don't think it even works even with them like it is DOA on arrival type situation. Once I started using it on television, it just took off from there and it's funny because it's been like a conflicting point for some people. You know, like I also have some people saying it's awesome that you use it. Number seven will be Lashley Hurtlock which are WWE fans associate the full Nelson submission with Chris Masters. Yeah. During the Ruthless aggression era Masters used the move and he labeled it as the master lock. Yeah. Masters managed to get the move over to such a degree that WWE began presenting the Master Lock challenge on Raw. Interestingly, the man who eventually broke the hold that being Bobby Lashley would be the one to reuse the move as during Lashley second run in WWE, he began to use the move as a secondary finishing move. Lashley similarly to Masters got the move over and he won his first WWE title with the submission. I like when he used his demo as the Hurtlock in 2021. Number six Bray Wyatt The Mandible Claw. The Mandible Claw is one of the most under-appreciated finishes around. The move was introduced by Mick Foley in WWE and it saw Foley places middle and ring finger into his opponent's mouth and pressed down on the bottom tissue. In theory, the pain of the hold should be so severe that the opponent should pass out. It was welcome when Bray Wyatt's the fiend character decided to use the move as it was about time that the move was introduced to a new generation. It was the perfect move for the fiend to use and in a selfless segment, Foley would even allow the fiend to deliver the move to him in this segment on Raw. It's common for wrestlers to be extremely visceral if wrestlers use their established move. Yet this wasn't the case with Foley. Simply put, Foley had nothing but love for the fiend using his trademark move. Which worked. It worked with his character. It was cool. Foley. One thing about Mick Foley, which we once again, we always got to give credit to, he is all about putting people over, bro. However he can, he will do what he can to put you over, even if that means letting you use his iconic move to get you over. I'm all for it, bro. Number five, Daniel Bryan, running knee. Daniel Bryan ascended to become one of the most popular stars in WWE. It made sense for Bryan to introduce a new finishing move. His prior move was known as the yes. Love the most top wrestlers. They usually have a secondary move to use when WWE don't want to go with a submission based finish for a match. Bryan introduced the running knee move in the summer of 2013 and he couldn't have picked a better match. Such a good move to. Bryan was wrestling John Cena at SummerSlam and he used the new move to defeat WWE's franchise guy and win the WWE title. Love their move. He's instantly put the move over as he had been seen and from that point onwards, the fans accepted the move as credible and legitimate. Number four, love that running knee is so good. He builds up for it. Oh, so good. So good. I wish he was ain't gonna lie to you. I do kind of wish he was in WWE still. McIntyre Claymore when Drew McIntyre returned to WWE in 2017, he introduced a new finish which was known Claymore is really good to know that McIntyre did use a move in his prior run on a few occasions, yet it was never marketed or labeled as a finishing move. McIntyre had previously used a future shock DDT, but this was a new move that allowed McIntyre to win matches in an intense yet quick manner. McIntyre's had significant success with the move, having defeated names such as Brock Lesnar, Randy Orton and Goldberg. Number three, the Undertaker TCB. The Undertaker's Hell's Gate finishing move isn't the only submission move that the Undertaker incorporated into one of his many incarnations. During the Ruthless aggression era, the Undertaker began to use an alternative move as his finisher and it was known as the taking care of business. The move would offer the abbreviated simply TCB and it saw the dead man perform a dragon sleeper on his opponent and it looked painful. It didn't warrant the crowd response that WWE were looking for. The move was quickly retired and the dead man would only use it on rare occasions, most notably at WrestleMania 21. I forgot he did this. I mean, it makes sense. It didn't really get over so they kind of buried it. I will have you do the other stuff you've been doing. When he collided with the legend killer Randy Orton. Number two, Chris Jericho, Codebreaker. When Y2J Chris Jericho returned to WWE in 2007, he once again showed the world why he was the undisputed king of evolution. Jericho returned with a new look and a brand new finishing move and it would keep the iconic walls of Jericho, but he would also introduce the Codebreaker. The Codebreaker is a double knee facebreaker and at first it was apparent that the fans were struggling to connect with the move. However, over time it became a stable of Jericho's character and he still uses the move 15 years on from his initial debut. But this isn't the first time that Jericho introduced a new finisher as in 2001 he introduced the Breakdown. This was a version of the Miz's skull crushing finale and due to the move failing to make any type of statement, the move was eventually retired. That's crazy, but it works with the Miz. That's crazy how some moves work with some wrestlers and it works better with others. And number one, Roman Reigns, Guillotine Show. Yeah, 2020 was a year in which WWE finally pulled a trigger on turning Roman Reigns heel. Yes, this was so good. He would debut as tribal chief persona and he would be joined by Paul Heyman in what would become a run of widespread praise as well as critical and financial success for WWE. As part of the new heel character, Reigns decided to introduce a new submission move. Love it. It was a deadly Guillotine choke. Love it. The best possible move for Reigns and due to the move looking incredibly legitimate, fans instantly took it seriously. Reigns had great success with the move having choked out the likes of Braun Strowman and Daniel Bryan and although Reigns still prefers to use the spears as primary finishing move, the Guillotine choke is always waiting to make a sudden reappearance. They have it folks. 10 news. It fits his character. It fits how he had changed because yeah, you can have him go out there and still do a spear as a heel.  He's just he's doing different moves and he's choking him out and he has this aggressiveness. He's talking trash while he's doing it. Just putting somebody to sleep and then they fade off. It's perfect because it matched his intensity and matched the change in his character. Now he's not here to hit you with a spear and in the match. No, he's he's willing to choke you out and hold it too. I love that love that and you can do that to set up a little hype moment for the baby face to try to overcome the guillotine. Right? It's it's it's a good addition to his move set. A lot of these were actually great for the the particular character that they were trying to, you know, elevate different moves with or add more moves with because it worked with the wrestler's character at that time. So comment down below. Let me know your favorite finisher of all time. Let me know down below. Doesn't matter from which company which wrestler. Let me know your favorite finisher of all time. I appreciate all love support. Guys, y'all on channel wrote 250k and I'm still here on speedy YouTube wrestling champion world. Please take a look at me. See you next week. Peace.


All this month at Appalachian Wireless, get the only truly water-resistant Android smartphone, the Samsung Galaxy S7, for just $99.99 and get a second one free while supplies last. Service agreement is required. Better service? Bigger savings. That's today's Appalachian Wireless. Saturday evening, a pair of juveniles accused of stealing one vehicle out of South Carolina ended up stealing a second vehicle here in Pikeville before eventually being stopped in Prestonburg. It all started when a Kentucky State trooper stopped a van in the Cassidy Boulevard shopping area that had been reported stolen from South Carolina. The driver and passenger, both juveniles, were also wanted by authorities and fled from the trooper on foot. Pikeville police officers assisted in the search for the juveniles, who then allegedly stole a pickup truck from the area. Their speedy getaway into Floyd County prompted another driver to call and report the truck to the Prestonburg Police Department. Around 8 p.m. on Saturday, the Prestonburg Police Department received a reckless driver complaining of a black pickup truck coming through the received limits. The officer located the vehicle and proceeded to pull them over. Lieutenant Tussie said once the truck was stopped, the driver, who was only 15 and his passenger, told the officer they were on the run. Two male subjects clearly just told them that they stole the vehicle out of Pikeville, that the state police was following them up there and they got away from them and made it to the Prestonburg. The two male juveniles were transported to the Brethit County Detention Center where they are now facing charges in both South Carolina and Kentucky. Reporting in Prestonburg for EKB News, I'm Shannon Deskins.