Gucci F/W 2020.21 Milan

[MulletProof]

^ See, it's not about highlighting differences in order to isolate for me but accepting diversity of perceptions and how your cultural background plays into that in order to perhaps, find a solution or at least optimism in social development. For instance, your perception of the US is so foreign to me as well as the one you say predominates in your region, it is now (having lived in the US) but it would be the same years ago before I even knew the country. I come from a background that is highly critical about it, where anything in favor makes you 'suspicious' or a sellout (as I am now), where the very poor are politically inclined (no fancy vocabulary or anything but they'll tell it more or less like it is, nobody's fooling them) because it's part of the.. DNA? history? I don't know but there's no disconnect. Recognizing the differences is important because after the wildest efforts to disrupt and divide (cough Operation Condor), it's extraordinary to find unity... only to get things like MERCOSUR. If you unite against imperialism without taking into account the vastly different populations (with their complex elements like religion and understanding of gender) and cultural/socioeconomic stages, a lot of potential is wasted in these efforts and much remains unchanged.

^^^ I had to google "Derek Zoolander" because no way it’s that Zoolander…

Yup, you can't make this stuff up. From interview magazine:

HARAMIS: I’ve heard you say that you don’t care about the future.

MICHELE: I don’t. I mean, come on. I’m not god. You could think that I’m the coolest and most attractive fashion designer, but I’m not unique. I’m only unique because I’m me. Just like you are only unique because you’re you. I’m not a diva.

I have to say, the attempt at social commentary must be so bad here cause I don't even know how I could spot it.

 

[Uemarasan]

Yes, this perception of the West comes from this country being a former colony of it. It's been my observation that Third World countries that have very strong communist/socialist characteristics tend to have a negative perception of the US (there are exceptions such as Vietnam). You might add Islamic countries to that group but there the sentiment is more mixed or muted depending on the predominant strain of Islam. However, countries that have democratic aspirations tend to be more positive, especially among the poor. Africa and Asia (I'm including countries east of Europe: India is definitely not anti-American or anti-West) are more positive when it comes to the US and the West. The vast majority of the Third World population is in these regions.

The poor are not politically inclined here. The government is very successful at manipulating the media and disempowering the educational system. In fact, the poor only vote when the rich politicians give them money and tell them whom to vote for. They've given up caring about who runs the country. All they want is to migrate to the West.

I still see the usefulness in the Third World referring to itself as such as a whole. I think considering the complexities of issues such as religion and ethnic differences is helpful when it comes to addressing local issues. However, these local issues are simply a byproduct of what I think is the bedrock and foundation of all problems here: the capitalist activity of the West. Because of this, I think a sense of solidarity in the Third World is necessary first and foremost. Then we can fine-tune and take into account regional and cultural differences once economic progress has been made.

There's a very useful and popular phrase here that I think more people (especially in the US and the West) should use when they desire to acquire a sober perspective on the ills of their societies: First World problems.

 

[MulletProof]

^ I think the more lenient attitude towards the US is not so based on democratic aspirations but simply lack of experience with the US unleashing their full potential on them (which might be the case in your corner of the world, being a former European colony..?). Those who've had their country stolen, turned upside down, blocked, destroyed, turned into one gigantic factory, you name it, by them and are naturally resentful... they still aspire to democracy. It's just lack of trust towards institutions, others, themselves and anything in between, what makes it difficult to achieve it and eventually leads to a state of anomie that is very hard to get out of.

I say First World problems jokingly but no such a thing, certainly not with the US and the direct impact their internal policies have overseas. If the US (or Russia) took a real isolationist approach by prioritizing on taking care of their own people, many regions far away would be able to finally grab some air. When their people is the least of their concerns and they need them to look away fast so they can play around with their rights, you have random assassinations on the other side of the world, chaos, several victims. So back to this thing on gender from 10 thousand words ago (lol), I will insist that internal movements, as 'first world problems' or 'trouble in paradise' as we'd want them to be, eventually have a beneficial impact (I'm not talking 4 months but like 20 years), because whether it's internal or external, it's resistance and it's pressure that maybe not even Westerners need as much as others in conflict (yes, conflict created by the big powers) areas do.

 

[Uemarasan]

Right now I live in a country that has been both a European and an American colony. Well, America has definitely turned this country upside down and is basically now one big factory for cheap labor, but you would be surprised at how benevolently the US and its culture are seen here. It's probably a combination of things: too much time has passed since World War II, and World War II has done a lot to salvage whatever profiteering the US was responsible for before the war. The US has been transformed into a "savior" by virtue of the end of WWII. Education also whitewashes the role this colony had in enriching the coffers of America in the early 20th century.

I've noticed it's the same case in countries such as India, Myanmar (well, before the West made such a big deal about the Rohingya), countries in Africa, but instead toward the European colonizers. An anti-West attitude does not seem to have deeply taken root. I can only guess at why that's so, but I think the heady mixture of the promise of democracy, soft power, and "benevolent" capitalism has done much to distract from the damage. Oh well, postcolonial studies can only untangle so much. I think the communist/socialist countries (and isolationist cultures such as Islamic ones) are in better shape when it comes to diagnosing the problem, because they aren't distracted by the very effective smokescreen that Western capitalism constantly discharges.

 

[bonnevie]

Another frumpy collection. Gucci needs to bring back sex, not this tumblr vintage thrift store clothing.