“In a society where the press is not holding those who govern accountable, we will have no chance to learn the truth.” – Alexander Nanau
On November 30, 2015, a fire broke out at Bucharest’s Colectiv nightclub. The free concert celebrating metal band Goodbye to Gravity’s latest album featured a pyrotechnic display during the performance. A spark from one of the fireworks caused the fire to spread quickly, soon engulfing the entire room. Twenty six people died on-site. A further 38 died in hospitals around Romania and neighbouring countries. Protests against the government’s lack of regulation erupted, leading to the government’s resignation.
Collective is a Romanian documentary film directed and co-written by Alexander Nanau. It was featured at the Venice Film Festival, the Toronto International Film Festival and this year’s Sundance Film Festival. The film has been submitted by Magnolia Pictures and Participant for the 2021 Academy Awards (Best Documentary). The Romanian Film Center/CNC Romania recently confirmed that Collective will be Romania’s official Oscar entry for Best International Feature. In the film, Nanau follows the crack team of journalists at the Romanian newspaper Gazeta Sporturilor as they uncover a vast health-care fraud that enriched politicians and moguls in the wake of the Colectiv nightclub fire.
The Global Search for Education is pleased to welcome Alexander Nanau.
“A young generation took to the streets against the corrupt authorities and the corrupt political class. It felt like change was coming.” – Alexander Nanau
Alex, in your own words, can you please explain to us what happened on November 30, 2015?
The Collectiv club fire should not have happened or, even if it happened, it should not have cost so many lives. The Collectiv club in Bucharest was a popular club where there were a lot of concerts. But one of the main reasons why so many people died on the spot is that the Romanian fire department allowed the club to function even though there were no fire exits. What we realized and what the film is about is the aftermath of that. Many more people, thirty-seven in total, continued dying after the fire in hospitals. The Romanian government, together with doctors and the health-care system, lied to everybody that they were capable of treating burn patients when they actually couldn’t take care of their patients because they didn’t have burn units. They refused to fly the young burn patients out of the country into burn clinics where they could have been rescued. Our film takes a look at the journalistic investigation after the fire that uncovered more information, including the mass manipulation by the Romanian authorities. The government claimed that Romania was as well prepared as a country like Germany to take care of patients. They journalists found out that the company that was producing disinfectants for about 350 Romanian hospitals was diluting the disinfectants. This meant that not only these burn victims, but hundreds to thousands of Romanian patients over the last ten years were infected by hospital bacteria because the disinfectants were diluted. It is a bit like The Third Man which was made into a film with Orson Welles, where he was selling diluted penicillin.
So the Romanian government refused to get some of these burn victims out of the country and into other hospitals where they could have been treated?
Yes, their discourse was we have a great health care system, we have the best specialists, we can treat these patients as well as the German health care system, there won’t be a better treatment for them than in Romania. It’s the kind of behavior that we see today around the world where the populistic discourse leads to death. We always ask ourselves “why did you do that?” And then we find out it’s because by keeping patients in the country they can spend the money in an illicit way, and actually steal it.
“We realized we were witnessing a story that goes into the heart of the relationship between citizens and those in power.” – Alexander Nanau
The CEO of the pharmaceutical company Hexi Pharma that was diluting the disinfectants ends up losing his life. What was the cause of death?
He had a car accident. He was alone in his car and he drove into a tree.
The timing of your movie is very relevant with the COVID-19 pandemic and world leaders needing to address better health care systems and better health safety measures. What specific parallels do you see between the story of the Colectiv nightclub fire and what’s going on right now worldwide with the coronavirus pandemic?
I think that the important thing is the lack of responsibility of those that govern the lives of the citizens that elected them. Secondly, it’s about corruption. The journalistic investigation in the film moves like a thriller which leads us to the facts. We discover that everything is linked to corruption and to laundering money from the health care system. Another link to the pandemic is that at any time something like a fire, or a virus or any other disease can suddenly impact all our lives and that’s the point where we realize how much we depend on the functioning of the societies we live in. In a society where the press is not holding those who govern accountable, we will have no chance to learn the truth.
“People have reacted very emotionally and have said, “oh, it’s like it is in our country, it’s not just a Romanian story.” – Alexander Nanau
Your film illustrates the fallout of societies that do not function properly.
Yes, I think there is also the link between the universality of the Collectiv story and what’s happening to all of us right now, and that’s the total loss of humanity. These people are not human anymore. We started to make the film because we saw a turning point in Romanian society. A young generation took to the streets against the corrupt authorities and the corrupt political class. It felt like change was coming. When we started to dive into the whole corruption and revelation we were shocked to realize the level of the lack of humanity amongst these decision makers to a whole nation that was traumatized by this event. They knew they would send victims to their death because they knew about the infections in Romanian hospitals due to the diluted disinfectants.
What key element of this real life story inspired you to tell it? What has been the audience reaction to this story so far, of those that you have screened this movie to and those who have seen this movie?
It was the fact that we saw there was a change in the street. A new generation wanted to claim back their society from a corrupt political class. Once we started, we realized we were witnessing a story that goes into the heart of the relationship between citizens and those in power. We wanted to understand how the relationship between power and citizens works, and the point of view of investigative journalists seemed the best point of view to tell it through, to understand this relationship, to understand how information flows from the power towards the citizens, and how citizens can react to it, and how citizens can take care of, or protect, or influence their own community and society. People have reacted very emotionally and have said, “oh, it’s like it is in our country, it’s not just a Romanian story.”
Could you elaborate a little more on “the change in the streets?”
After the fire, we had mass demonstrations that were actually the biggest demonstrations since the Revolution in ’89, and it was just young people demonstrating against the corrupt political class and demanding a change. Demanding the government to step down and to have a politically independent government until reelections.
What do you want audiences to take away from this movie?
Normally I don’t make the films with an idea in my head as to what I want people to take away. I think that the most important question for me is, “how do I influence the community or society I’m living in? And what kind of society do I want to live in? And am I courageous enough to be true to myself and to stand up when I see corruption or when I see something really bad and wrong happening? Making this film is like holding a mirror in front of my face and asking myself if I’m bold enough to be myself and to stand up to things that I believe in, and to be a better human being.
What’s next for you? What are you working on now, in terms of future projects? Is there anything you’ve got your eye on right now that you’re planning?
Yeah, there are two, three projects that we’re developing but I never talk about projects when they’re in development. I’m superstitious, let’s say. Regarding Collective, the film will be released by Magnolia Pictures and Participant, in theaters and on VOD, on November 20th, and it will be released at the same date in the UK and France and Europe. It is now up for the European Film Academy Awards and, most probably, it will also try to run with all the other documentaries for the Academy Awards in the United States.
Thank you Alex
(Dallin Agatone contributed to this article)
C.M. Rubin and Alexander Nanau
Thank you to our 800 plus global contributors, artists, teachers, entrepreneurs, researchers, business leaders, students and thought leaders from every domain for sharing your perspectives on the future of learning with The Global Search for Education each month.
C. M. Rubin (Cathy) is the Founder of CMRubinWorld, an online publishing company focused on the future of global learning, and the co-founder of Planet Classroom. She is the author of three best-selling books and two widely read online series. Rubin received 3 Upton Sinclair Awards for “The Global Search for Education.” The series, which advocates for Youth, was launched in 2010 and brings together distinguished thought leaders from around the world to explore the key education issues faced by nations.
Strict lockdowns have devastated millions of families’ incomes while failing to bring success in suppressing covid mortality.
Mitch Nemeth
During the early onset of covid-19 in the spring, government officials across the political spectrum widely agreed that government intervention and forced closure of many businesses was necessary to protect public health. This approach has clearly failed in the United States as it led to widespread economic devastation, including millions of jobs lost, bankruptcies, and extremely severe losses in profitability. Nor have states with strict lockdowns succeeded in bringing about fewer covid deaths per million than states that were less strict.
Consequently, a few months into the pandemic, some governors weighed the competing economic costs with covid-19 containment and slowly reopened their economies. Of course, these governors did not mandate businesses reopen; however, they provided businesses the option to reopen.
Hysteria ensued as many viewed easing restrictions as akin to mass murder. The Atlantic famously dubbed Georgia governor Brian Kemp’s easing of restrictions as “human sacrifice” and referred to Georgians as being in a “case study in pandemic exceptionalism.” Instead, we should view the lockdowns as a case study in the failure of heavy-handed approaches in containing a highly infectious virus.
Now that we are nine months into this pandemic, there is a clearer picture of how state government approaches varied widely. It is clear that “reopened” economies are faring much better overall than less “reopened” economies. “Fueled by broader, faster economic reopenings following the initial coronavirus rash, conservative-leaning red states are by and large far outpacing liberal-leaning blue states in terms of putting people back to work,” writes Carrie Sheffield. This follows logically especially when considering that human beings learn to adapt very quickly. Now, we have learned much more about treating this virus and about who is most at risk from infection.
Not Everyone Can #StayHome
Even so, many proponents of lockdowns still contend that every covid infection is a failure of public policy. But this position is largely a luxury of white-collar workers who can afford to work from home. Lockdowns have been described as “the worst assault on the working class in half a century.” Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician, says, “the blue-collar class is ‘out there working, including high-risk people in their 60s.” Kulldorff’s colleague Jay Bhattacharya notes that one reason “minority populations have had higher mortality in the U.S. from the epidemic is because they don’t often have the option…to stay at home.” In effect, top-down lockdown policies are “regressive” and reflect a “monomania,” says Dr. Bhattacharya. With this in mind, it is easy to see why more affluent Americans tend to view restrictive measures as the appropriate response.
For many Americans, prolonged periods of time without gainful employment, income, or social interaction are not only impossible but potentially deadly. Martin Kulldorff notes that covid-19 restrictions do not consider broader public health issues and create collateral damage; among the collateral damage is a “worsening incidence of cardiovascular disease and cancer and an alarming decline in immunization.” Dr. Bhattacharya correctly notes that society will be “counting the health harms from these lockdowns for a very long time.”
Mixed Messages
Bhattacharya emphasized the politicization of these restrictions: “When Black Lives Matter protests broke out in the spring, ‘1,300 epidemiologists signed a letter saying that the gatherings were consistent with good public health practice,’” while those same epidemiologists argued that “we should essentially quarantine in place.” Such a contradiction defies logic and undercuts arguments about the lethality of this virus. If this novel virus truly were as devastating to the broader public as advertised, then political leaders supporting mass protests and riots during a pandemic seem to be ill founded. This contradiction has been cited in countless lawsuits challenging the validity and constitutionality of covid-19 restrictions.
Separately, these often heavy-handed restrictions have targeted constitutionally protected rights like the freedom of religion. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito criticized the Nevada governor’s restrictions saying, “that Nevada would discriminate in favor of the powerful gaming industry and its employees may not come as a surprise…We have a duty to defend the Constitution, and even a public health emergency does not absolve us of that responsibility.” This scathing criticism, however, did not gain the support of the Supreme Court as a 5–4 majority deferred to the governor’s “responsibility to protect the public in a pandemic.”
The Worst State and Local Offenders
Such deference may be politically beneficial for the Supreme Court, but it presents a much more significant problem for basic freedoms. For one, many of these covid restrictions have been issued by state governors or administrative agencies rather than through democratic means. Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer has been targeted for her continued sidestepping of democratic channels and for her top-down approach.
These covid restrictions are somewhat meaningless without ample enforcement and resources, so many major American cities have created task forces for enforcing these covid restrictions. For example, Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti has threatened to shut off public utilities for those who host massive house parties. Garcetti wants to treat private gatherings similarly to the bars and nightclubs he has forced closed. Not only is this ridiculous, but it is also authoritarian; there have been few checks on his ability to weaponize public utilities this way. The New York City Sheriff’s Office recently “busted a party of more than 200 people who were flouting coronavirus restrictions.” Their crime? Deputies found around two hundred maskless individuals “dancing, drinking and smoking hookah inside.” In typical government fashion, the owner of the venue was “slapped with five summonses…for violation of emergency orders, unlicensed sale of alcohol and unlicensed warehousing of alcohol.” What would we do without the government?
California governor Gavin Newsom has long been a part of this effort to restrict freedoms under the guise of public health. Governor Newsom and the California Department of Public Health released new “safety” guidelines for all private gatherings during the Thanksgiving holiday. According to Newsweek, “all gatherings must include no more than three households, including hosts and guests, and must be held outdoors, lasting for two hours or less.” Given Newsom’s interventionist tendencies, it is likely that these restrictions will be enforced. How will the government determine how many households are at a Thanksgiving meal and who will enforce the two-hour window? These are questions that journalists should ask.
Meanwhile, the varying levels of economic recovery between red states and blue states demonstrate how top-down policy can be a failure. Strict lockdowns have devastated millions of families’ incomes while failing to bring success in suppressing covid mortality. This failed experiment must be brought to an end.
Mitchell Nemeth is a Risk Management and Compliance professional in Atlanta, Georgia. He holds a Master in the Study of Law from the University of Georgia Law School, and he has a BBA in Finance from the University of Georgia. His work has been featured at the Foundation for Economic Education, RealClearMarkets, Merion West, and Medium.
“I really love to create a world that is so similar to the real one.” – Shahrbanoo Sadat
Afghan Director Shahrbanoo Sadat won a prize at the Director’s fortnight in Cannes in 2016 for her film debut, Wolf and Sheep, a story about shepherd children living in the mountains of central Afghanistan. In 2019, Sadat directed a sequel. It is called The Orphanage and it follows the life of one of the children from her original film Quodrat. Like Wolf and Sheep, Sadat shot The Orphanage in Tadjikistan. Quodrat is now a teenager played again by Quodratollah Qadiri. The story takes place in Kabul during the 1981 Russian occupation. Both Quodrat’s parents are dead. The young man is obsessed with Bollywood movies. Arrested for selling cinema tickets on the black market he is made to live in a Soviet-run orphanage.
Behind the safe walls of the orphanage, the world Quodrat once knew is changing as the Mujahideens start the civil war.
The Global Search for Education is pleased to welcome Shahrbanoo Sadat.
“I don’t use the script on set and my actors improvise all the time.” – Shahrbanoo Sadat
Shahrbanoo, you’ve spoken about your desire to show the everyday stories of Afghanistan, an Afghanistan that the world doesn’t really know. How much of your own personal experiences growing up in a village in Afghanistan influence your storytelling?
I started filmmaking with cinema vérité. I completely fell for it. Those two words, reality and truth, have always been with me since that time. I adore observational cinema. It’s strange to me why I shifted to fictional cinema rather than documentary. Although I don’t hesitate to borrow elements from documentary cinema whenever I need them. I see myself as a kind of free daughter of cinema vérité. I really love to create a world that is so similar to the real one. Maybe that’s why I invest a lot of time in casting. I don’t use the script on set and my actors improvise all the time. I think casting is a very important part of my work. If the right people are cast, then the wheels are on the road.
Afghanistan has no cinema industry, but in the eyes of international filmmakers it is always a darling. Filmmakers in other countries have premieres in major film festivals like Cannes and Berlin. They even receive Academy Awards like the short film last year. I personally never ever relate with such movies. They have things in common. They are cliches. The story stays on the surface. They just reproduce the same picture the world has already seen from Afghanistan, i.e. another third world country in a war with poor people who suffer from it. The story line never goes anywhere else. Oh no! It goes. The other direction is making heroes out of people, especially the women who are fighting for their families and their societies. I am a hard core critic about such movies. I think my obsession with showing real life by showing everyday life comes from that, at least a big part of it.
I want to make Afghan movies for international audiences including Afghan people. I think Afghanistan is a rich county in terms of stories and it deserves to be portrayed better. Afghanistan may have its own cinema one day. Maybe in the next 50 years? But for sure, I am just talking about such movies. That is a film that has a completely Afghan identity and that has an Afghan soul.
The Orphanage follows the life of one of the children (Qodrat) in Wolf and Sheep (which won a top prize at Cannes in 2016). What inspired you to make the sequel?
Everything was planned before shooting my debut film, Wolf and Sheep. I met my friend Anwar Hashimi in 2008 and he told me about his idea of writing his life story. He didn’t feel confident enough doing it on his own as he didn’t see himself as a writer. We made a deal. He would write 8 pages every day and email them to me the next day. He did this for one year. I collected 800 pages of his text. When I read them my mind totally blew up. I didn’t know he could write so beautifully. I think he didn’t realize either. I fell for his text. It was written so simply but at the same time it was so poetic, so political, so personal and so honest. I told Anwar immediately that I wanted to make five films out of it. Maybe because his text was about five chapters of his life. Anwar accepted and I started my pentalogy project. At the moment, I am working on the third part and two more are on their way.
I got very good feedback about the work from people and festivals all around the world but not in Afghanistan. Ordinary people liked it a lot but critics and filmmakers didn’t like it. They didn’t like the Bollywood part which I personally liked a lot. They think my films are not Afghan enough because I don’t shoot inside Afghanistan. Honestly, I don’t care about their opinion. I know I am going in the right direction.
“I want to make Afghan movies for international audiences including Afghan people.” – Shahrbanoo Sadat
Why did you decide to cast Quodratollah Qadiri, now a teenager, in the role again? What do you think are some of the important lessons we learn through Quodrat’s eyes as your history of Afghanistan unfolds?
I considered more than 20,000 children in different high schools in Kabul in a year. I found other children but I couldn’t find my main role. Then I thought about Qodrat, my child actor from my previous film. I traveled to central Afghanistan and I visited him. He had grown up like magic beans. Even his voice had changed. I couldn’t recognize him in the beginning. After I talked to him, I was sure he should play Qodrat again. And then I cast Sediqa, the other child actor from Wolf and Sheep. She played the role of the “girl in the dream” in the Bollywood parts of the movie.
Lessons? Qodrat is not really a classic main character. He is there and we are there because of him and that’s it. He opens the door for us to be able to observe that world. I wanted to show the life of children in that period of time and how the war surprised them so suddenly. 1989 was a very political year in the history of Afghanistan. It was the year the Soviets left Afghanistan after almost 10 years. It was the year when the Afghan government started peace negotiations with Mujahideen. It was the year Mujahideen felt more confident after the Soviets left and dared to attack Kabul more and more until the government collapsed in 1992 and they took Kabul. The peace negotiations between the USA and the Taliban are taking place right now. The country is on the edge again and there is a huge risk that the Taliban will rule the country and make Afghanistan into an Islamic emirate. USA forces are leaving Afghanistan. Many Afghans have left the country. No one can really see any future.
I think Afghanistan is a rich county in terms of stories and it deserves to be portrayed better.” – Shahrbanoo Sadat
How do you feel about that? Do you believe the recent ceasefire will have any impact on women’s rights?
I believe not only women but the entire country will go down with that ceasefire. I am absolutely against it. Anyone with a brain should be against it. Afghanistan experienced the Taliban between 1996-2001. Everyone knows their mentality. They want one thing and that’s an Islamic emirate. With that one single thing, human rights, freedom of speech, civilization, modernity, education, everything vanishes. God! They cannot even talk properly. They have no sense of how to engage in a conversation. They only speak about what they want and they do not want to listen. Watch their videos. The US is giving them credit by accepting all their conditions. The Afghan government is not part of that negotiation. The negotiation is between the US and the Taliban. The US wants to leave and hand the country to the Taliban.
How difficult is it to get funding for important movies like The Orphanage?
The Orphanage and my debut film, Wolf and Sheep, both got finance through international funding and the European fund system as I am working together with a German/Danish producer. We have been working with co-production and we could get money from there as well.
There is no funding system or any state fund in Afghanistan. The importance of culture and cinema are invisible to many people there. At the moment, I am the only filmmaker from Afghanistan who lives there and is still carrying an Afghanistan passport. I am able to finance my movies through international funding in Europe and all over the world. Afghanistan hardly produces even one film per year. Filmmakers are making mostly short films or documentaries with their own budgets. I am really grateful that I have the chance to work with international producers and crews. And I think co-production MUST be the solution for Afghan filmmakers. There is a cultural mafia in Afghanistan that makes everything very hard, especially for the ones who are not part of it.
Where can audiences see Wolf and Sheep and The Orphanage now?
The Orphanage is almost global via Mubi. Wolf and Sheep is on Amazon for those living in England. It’s also online for people in Denmark. It’s on DVDs and in libraries for people living in Germany. When I finish the pentalogy, I can put the five films on YouTube or Netflix or any other platform that is accessible to the public. And then there’s google. If the film is premiered or played in a country, people can find it somewhere on the internet.
(Photos are courtesy of Virginie Surdej)
C.M. Rubin and Shahrbanoo Sadat
Thank you to our 800 plus global contributors, artists, teachers, entrepreneurs, researchers, business leaders, students and thought leaders from every domain for sharing your perspectives on the future of learning with The Global Search for Education each month.
C. M. Rubin (Cathy) is the Founder of CMRubinWorld, an online publishing company focused on the future of global learning, and the co-founder of Planet Classroom. She is the author of three best-selling books and two widely read online series. Rubin received 3 Upton Sinclair Awards for “The Global Search for Education.” The series, which advocates for Youth, was launched in 2010 and brings together distinguished thought leaders from around the world to explore the key education issues faced by nations.
I told you — and everyone knew — that this election was GOING to be contested, regardless of who was named as “President-elect.” It’s sad that we’ve arrived a place in America now where we EXPECT all of our elections to be fraudulent. Over the past several elections, there have been blatant improprieties. The election — or perhaps better stated — the SELECTION of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008 (and 2012) was highly suspect. Both times, there were multiple large cities around the country in which his opponent did not receive even one single vote. Yet nothing was ever done about it. It was reported, but there was never any investigation and literally a day later there was no mention of it anymore at all. The Republicans simply quit. Many citizens were outraged, yet their voices were never heard and there was no justice.
I find it incredibly outrageous and hypocritical now, after Democrats have spent three years and 40 million taxpayer dollars trying to prove Donald Trump stole the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton through voter fraud and collusion with Russia — and after ALL OF THAT, there was never an ounce of evidence to be found — that they’re now saying the idea of voter fraud on the part of Democrats is simply “impossible.” “Outrageous,” they say. “How DARE you imply anything improper was done anywhere in this election!” They have the nerve to assert they hold such moral “highground” that they would never stoop to such tactics. Friends, over this past year, it has become ABSOLUTELY clear and plain for anyone with eyes to see that the Democrats are ABSOLUTELY corrupt to the core — haters of God, nothing but sheer disdain for America and our Constitution and with a seriously unbridled hatred for Donald Trump.
I’m compiling this message on November 6th — three days after election day. As of this time, no “winner” has yet been declared, but the mainstream media outlets are showing their extreme Left-wing bias again as they are sickeningly “rooting” for Joe Biden on every TV newscast, in every mainstream newspaper and on every network radio channel. Not to mention the ongoing censorship and lies on most all social media and internet search engines. They’re all CLEARLY “chomping at the bit” to get the “go ahead” to pronounce Biden the “winner.” They can’t hardly wait. The fake news and lying media in this country have been complicit in all of this, and should be held as accountable for election tampering as those who, I believe, have been working for months now, filling out fake ballots and stockpiling them in warehouses, preparing them to be “dumped” into the official record as needed.
And for those of you who think Fox News is our “fair and balanced” “savior,” you need to open your eyes. Because this so-called “conservative” news network has been compromised for many years. You DO realize that it is now part of the Disney Corporation, don’t you? Yes, Disney, which has worked tirelessly for years to indoctrinate young children with subtle — and not-so-sublte — Leftist ideologies and propaganda. They promote witchcraft, the occult, earth-worship, and worse. Disney has also become infamous in recent years for their highly-promoted “Gay Days,” which openly celebrate sodomy, “framing” that abomination in a colorful, “kid-friendly” way so as to recruit more little children into hell.
Some may consider this trivial, but I don’t: on election night, Fox News featured photo images of the two candidates as they tallied the electoral votes. Constantly on the screen was an image of a happy, smiling, lovable Joe Biden on top; beneath that photo was an image of Donald Trump — probably the worst photo of him ever taken, showing him scowling, snarling and looking like the meanest, ugliest “villain” you’ve ever seen. Those hosting the broadcast on election night were clearly disgusted every time they were FORCED to “call” a state for the president. Their Left-wing bias was also clearly obvious when, early on in the evening, they called the state of Virginia for Biden, with only 1% of the vote counted there and the president UP by more than a 2-to-1 margin.
At 3:00 am Wednesday morning, all the battleground states suddenly stopped counting as it was getting a little scary for the Democrats. It was looking like Donald Trump was going to win re-election. Notably, all of these states are governed by Democrats. Then, at 4:30 in the morning, counting began again, but suddenly — immediately — Joe Biden was ahead in all those states, by tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of votes. So while Americans slept, SOMEBODY pulled the “old switch-a-roo.”
How did this happen? Citizen reporters and poll watchers have released videos taken in the middle of the night showing vans pulling up to polling places in each of these states — workers unloading crates of ballots and carrying them inside. In multiple states, it’s been reported that thousands of mail-in ballots were suddenly “found” — but not ONE of those mail-in ballots that mysteriously appeared were for Trump.
For example, they “found” 138,000 votes in Michigan and 120,000 votes in Wisconsin between 3:00 and 4:30 am — and NOT ONE vote for Trump was found in any of those. In Wisconsin, 41,206 MORE votes were counted than there are registered voters… so far. They’re not finished yet.
Now, let’s go back to October 24th — just ten days before election day. Joe Biden was addressing his followers on live video as he read from a written statement. He stated, “We’re in a situation where we have put together, and you guys did it …for President Obama’s administration before this… We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.”
I’ve stated before that those on the side of Satan ALWAYS tell us what they’re going to do, what they are planning, BEFORE they do it. It seems to be a “rule” for them — they have to show their hand ahead of time, but usually, their statements are cloaked in mystery. In this case, he clearly said what he said. There’s no doubt, and you can still find this video all over the internet. (I’m amazed it hasn’t been banned and scrubbed from existence by now, but it’s still there). Of course, the fake “fact checkers” immediately came out and said Biden “misspoke” and his comments were taken out of context, and what he REALLY meant to say was that they put together a system to make sure voter fraud did NOT take place. Really? The man is READING a written statement right in front of him! I believe he slipped up (how many times has THAT happened?) and actually told us the truth.
On Wednesday, courts ruled that Republican poll watchers must be allowed to supervise the remaining ballot counts in the battleground states. Yet city police, county sheriffs and election boards across the country have defied these court rulings and have NOT allowed oversight of ballot counting. In some cases, the counting continues yet today, behind closed doors. Windows covered over with cardboard. Poll watchers that HAVE been allowed to be present have been told to stay 30 to 100 feet away from the workers — forced to see whatever they’re able to see — with binoculars! One poll watcher in Philadelphia observed multiple workers dumping ballots in a large trash container in the corner of the room. When he was told by election officials there he could not video tape these activities, he was forcibly removed from the facility. All this is in defiance of court orders.
In Wisconsin, one person reported that they were standing in line to receive their ballot and the man in front of them was questioned by poll workers. They said, “our records show that you requested a mail-in ballot. Did you not receive it?” He replied, “Yes I received it, but I never filled it out.” They then handed him a ballot and he proceeded to vote. In other instances, postal workers have come forward stating they’ve been ordered to hand-stamp mail-in ballots with the postmark “November 3rd” even though they arrived days later, so that those “late” ballots — that are now hitting post offices in all the battleground states by the pallet load — can still be counted. There are also countless instances where the signatures on the election sheets do not match the signatures on the voter registration forms, yet these are never questioned.
Rumors are circulating that the OFFICIAL mail-in ballots contained a “watermark” — and if copied to produce additional “fake” ballots, that watermark would not reproduce. Therefore, it would be easy to identify fake ballots in the system. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but maybe we’ll see in the coming days and weeks.
President Trump’s legal team has started litigation in many states, and he absolutely should. Yet even when the courts have ruled in his favor regarding poll watchers and vote counting, the city, county, state and other election officials have thumbed their noses at those courts and defied the rulings — continuing the questionable ballot counting, ALWAYS in favor of Joe Biden.
It is sheer insanity to believe that this election was not fraudulent. Two days before the election, Donald Trump had 57,000 people at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. One day before the election, 27,000 attended his rally in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Some say that rally attendance has nothing to do with people actually following through and voting. But I have BEEN at Trump rallies. The people there are patriotic Americans, and enthusiasm has been through the roof. God is always honored at Trump rallies. Every one opens with prayer, and references — not just to God, but to JESUS CHRIST — are prevalent throughout the events.
When I went to vote, I arrived at my polling place at 6:30 in the morning. Polls opened at 7. The large parking lot at our municipal center was already packed, and the line of people standing in the early-morning cold stretched to the end of the parking lot. By the time the doors opened, the line of people stretched OUT of the parking lot, down the street and out to the highway. There was an incredible amount of enthusiasm for this election. Were all those standing in line with me voting for Trump? Of course not. But compare a Trump rally, with 57,000 people in Butler, Pennsylvania (a town of 12,000 people) to a Biden rally in a major metropolitan area, with EIGHT to TWELVE people (which was typical). In Texas, days before the election there was a Trump car-parde that stretch for 97 MILES. You tell me which voters were most enthusiastic and likely to vote.
Understand this: I do NOT “worship” Donald Trump. I am often frustrated by his gruff language and I’m upset that he was not able to “drain the swamp” as he promised, bringing justice to those who continue, even to this day to commit treason and sedition against our country. But never before in my lifetime have I witnessed a president so hated, without reason, and so persecuted at every turn, every single day by Leftist God-haters, Socialists, Marxists, Communists, New World Order Globalists and career politicians on both sides.
I wish he would have done more to defund Planned Parenthood. I wish he would have had the courage to state that sodomy is unnatural and an abomination. I wish he would have “locked her up!” I wish he would have done a lot of things that he didn’t accomplish. But look at all he DID accomplish for America — and all that IN SPITE of constant, daily attacks from every single direction. The last four years, I believe, were a “reprieve” — a last chance for America to repent of it’s apathy and for the Church to rise up and take back the ground the devil has stolen. But we failed. Don’t blame Trump for the stuff that never got done. Look in the mirror. What did WE do to push back against the forces of darkness when we had the chance? I’ll tell you what we did: we kept our mouths shut, we self-quarantined, we wore our masks, like compliant fearful sheep.
This election is absolutely the most important America will ever see. Because if Trump is not re-elected, it WILL be because of massive corruption and massive voter fraud at every level. I haven’t even gotten into all the various other things the Democrats used to create their “most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,” such as the computer software known as “The Hammer.” (Look it up — you will be stunned). Yes, if Trump loses this, we all lose. America will have become a third-world “banana republic.”
What’s worse, we’ll then be handed over to the New World Order Globalists and Communist China. Mandatory masking will never go away. Vaccines will absolutely be mandatory. You will not be allowed to travel, buy or sell without them, or most likely, even leave your home — or the internment camp they place you in. Churches will be closed and forced underground. The first and second amendments will only be the first and second parts of our Constitution to be sliced and diced. Mark my words.
This is a battle for our nation and the freedom we have enjoyed for so long, by the grace of Almighty God. Perhaps saddest of all, 47% of professing evangelical Christians did NOT bother to vote in this election — on par with all previous elections. That equates to about 48 MILLION votes. Do you think that might have made a difference?
2nd Corinthians reminds us, “…where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” That’s the Holy Spirit, folks. The same Holy Spirit, the same Jesus, the same GOD that the Leftist demons spit upon daily. The same Christ that they HATE and rage against with a seriously unreasonable hatred. This is a spiritual battle. It may be playing out today in “American politics” but if you don’t clearly see the marked difference between those with the Holy Spirit of God and those with the spirit of Satan, the spirit of anti-Christ, then I question your salvation. This isn’t so much about Trump as it is about a CHOICE between good and evil, between God and Satan. Between liberty and enslavement. Between life and death. If the Democrats steal this, THERE WILL NEVER BE ANY LIBERTY IN AMERICA AGAIN. This is our last chance at survival. We need to ALL be on our knees in prayer right now, and we better all be prepared because I fear this spirital battle is about to be played out in the physical realm. The true remnant of God will not forsake Him — or our nation. Patriots WILL rise up to defend it, and given the viciousness of our wicked opponents, it’s not going to be pleasant. May justice and righteousness prevail.
Legal questions surrounding the Biden family’s business deals with a Chinese energy conglomerate almost certainly will follow Joe Biden into the White House should the former vice president ultimately win the disputed election, good government groups predict.
“These issues are not going to go away with a Biden presidency,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Daily Signal.
The FBI reportedly opened an ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden, the former vice president’s son, and unnamed business associates for possible money laundering in connection with a joint venture with CEFC China Energy, the Chinese conglomerate.
What looks like a weaker Republican majority in the Senate may not bode well for oversight, and Fitton said he wouldn’t be optimistic about accountability.
The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>
But, he added, even the Justice Department under a Biden administration doesn’t mean zero accountability.
“If an investigation starts, it’s not easy to shut it down,” Fitton said. “Joe Biden would face significant political pressure if he tried to shut down the investigation. It wouldn’t be easy.”
With the FBI investigation already commenced, it likely would go forward aggressively under a second Trump administration.
The Daily Signal interviewed Fitton and others for this report before Election Day. Major media outlets called the Nov. 3 election for Biden, but President Donald Trump has alleged fraud in key states and his reelection campaign has taken legal action.
CEFC China Energy, which has links to the Chinese Communist Party, paid Hunter Biden at least $5 million in 2017, according to a Senate report.
This was after his father completed a second term as vice president under President Barack Obama.
However, in December 2013, when his father was vice president, Hunter Biden notably accompanied him on Air Force Two to China and met with another business associate not related to CEFC. That trip doesn’t appear to be the subject of the FBI’s current probe.
“Joe Biden would be 100% compromised as commander in chief to our greatest enemy,” said M.A. Taylor, director of “Riding the Dragon,” a documentary film narrated by investigative journalist Peter Schweizer.
The film outlines the financial relationship between the Biden family and the Chinese government that grew during Joe Biden’s vice presidency from 2009 through 2016.
“I don’t see a lot of accountability from Congress, censors in social media, or the press blackout,” Taylor told The Daily Signal, referring to social media’s suppression of stories by the New York Post about the content of files found on Hunter Biden’s laptop computer.
“He would be the least vetted president we’ve ever seen,” Taylor said. “The media is compromised. Nobody trusts Big Tech anymore. Nobody trusts the press anymore.”
If Biden governs in a way that is favorable to China, it could have long-term consequences, Taylor added:
Fortunately, the government never stays in one party’s hands for very long; but in two years, this could do long-term damage to the United States. Just because you punish a president, China [still] could expand its influence and build more islands in the South China Sea. So the damage could be permanent, even down the road.
Hunter Biden, 50, has a law degree from Yale. In May 2017, he formed the company SinoHawk with his uncle James Biden and partner Tony Bobulinski to do business with CEFC, the Chinese conglomerate. The plan was for SinoHawk to invest $10 million from CEFC in energy and infrastructure projects in the United States and around the world.
Although the SinoHawk-CEFC joint venture stopped in August 2017, Hunter and James Biden reportedly kept working with the conglomerate.
In September, two Senate committees—Finance and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs—issued a joint oversight report that found CEFC had wired Hunter Biden at least $5 million beginning Aug. 7, 2017. The Senate report flagged some of the wire payments for possible criminal financial activity:
On Aug. 4, 2017, CEFC Infrastructure Investment (US) LLC, a subsidiary of Ye Jianming’s CEFC China Energy Company that listed Gongwen Dong as its director, sent Hunter Biden’s law firm, Owasco, a payment for $100,000. This transaction was identified for potential criminal financial activity.
One of the investment entities of CEFC Infrastructure Investment is reportedly Shanghai Huaxin Group, a Chinese state-owned enterprise ‘engaged in petroleum products.’ That company is owned by CEFC Shanghai International Group Ltd., which is controlled by Shanghai Guosheng Group, another state-owned enterprise. According to reporting, CEFC Shanghai was a CEFC subsidiary linked to the aforementioned corruption allegations involving the head of the China Development Bank.
Bobulinski, in a statement Oct. 22 to reporters and in a recent interview with Tucker Carlson of Fox News Channel, said Joe Biden was “the big guy” in an email that apportioned stakes for partners in the joint venture. The email said it would mean 20% equity for Hunter Biden and 10% for “the big guy.”
The Biden campaign has said that Joe Biden never held equity in his son’s companies. But the campaign frequently gave sketchy explanations about the authenticity of the emails.
One document shows James Biden’s share increased from 10% to 20%, which Bobulinski told Carlson he concluded was a way to mask Joe Biden’s continuing 10% share.
Possibly a larger issue has to do with millions of dollars from Chinese donors to the University of Pennsylvania’s Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement, said Tom Anderson, director of the government integrity project at the National Legal and Policy Center.
The center filed a complaint about the donations with the U.S. Department of Education in May.
“We don’t have enough information yet to say if he is compromised,” Anderson told The Daily Signal, referring to Joe Biden.
The Biden Center received $70 million from Chinese donors since 2017, with $22 million of it from anonymous donors, according to the National Legal and Policy Center’s complaint. The complaint asks the Education Department to force the University of Pennsylvania to disclose more information about the donors.
Anderson noted that many staffers for the center likely will join the new Biden administration.
“It’s an incubation for corruption,” Anderson said. “Staffers at the Biden Center are future administration officials and could feel beholden to these donors. That’s how guys get compromised.”
If one takes the publications of the World Economic Forum (WEF) as an indication of how the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” will change society, the world is facing a massive onslaught against individual liberty and private property. A new kind of collectivism is about to emerge. Like the communism of the past, the new project appeals to the public with the assurance of technological advancement and social inclusion. Additionally, ecological sustainability and the promise of longevity or even immortality are used to entice the public. In reality, however, these promises are deeply dystopian.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution
According to Klaus Schwab, the founder and current executive chairman of the WEF, the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” (2016) represents a new stage of the disruptive technological advances that began toward the end of the eighteenth century with the textile industry and the use of steam power. The Second Industrial Revolution took place in the decades before and after 1900. It created a plethora of new consumer goods and production technologies that allowed mass production. The third Industrial Revolution began around 1950 with the breakthroughs in digital technologies. Now, according to Klaus Schwab, the fourth Industrial Revolution means that the world is moving toward “a true global civilization.”
The fourth Industrial Revolution provides the potential “to robotize humanity, and thus compromise our traditional sources of meaning—work, community, family, identity.” Schwab predicts that the fourth Industrial Revolution will “lift humanity into a new collective and moral consciousness.”
Transhumanism is part of the transformation that comes with the fourth Industrial Revolution, as artificial intelligence (AI) will surpass even the best human performances at specific tasks. The new technologies “will not stop at becoming part of the physical world around us—they will become part of us, Schwab declares.
In the foreword to Schwab’s latest book, Shaping the Future of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (2018), the CEO of Microsoft, Satya Nadella, states that the evolution of the new technologies “is entirely within our power.” Microsoft and the other high-tech companies “are betting on the convergence of several important technology shifts—mixed reality, artificial intelligence and quantum computing.”
Satya Nadella informs readers that Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Facebook, and IBM will cooperate in an AI partnership that will work to develop and test the technology in fields such as “automobiles and healthcare, human-AI collaboration, economic displacement, and how AI can be used for social good.”
All-Embracing Transformation
In the preface to his latest book, Klaus Schwab predicts that the fourth Industrial Revolution will “upend the existing ways of sensing, calculating, organizing, acting and delivering.” He states that “the negative externalities” of the present global economy harm “the natural environment and vulnerable populations.”
The changes that come with the new technologies will be comprehensive and will topple “the way we produce and transport goods and services.” The revolution will upset how “we communicate, the way we collaborate, and the way we experience the world around us.” The change will be so profound that the advances in neurotechnologies and biotechnologies “are forcing us to question what it means to be human.”
Like Satya Nadella’s foreword, Schwab’s text reiterates several times the claim that the “evolution of the fourth Industrial Revolution” is “entirely within our power” when “we” use the “window of opportunity” and drive for “empowerment.” The “we” that both authors speak of is the global technocratic elite that calls for central control and state interventionism (called “shaping the future”) in a new system that is characterized by intimate cooperation between business and government, or, more specifically between high tech and a handful of key states.
The World Economic Forum’s webpage about the “Great Reset” proclaims that “the Covid-19 crisis” presents “a unique window of opportunity to shape the recovery.” At the present “historic crossroads,” the world leaders must address “the inconsistencies, inadequacies and contradictions” ranging from healthcare and education to finance and energy. The forum defines “sustainable development” as the central aim of the global management activities.
The “Great Reset” calls for global cooperation to attain goals such as “harnessing the fourth Industrial Revolution,” “restoring the health of the environment,“ “redesigning social contracts, skills, and jobs,” and “shaping the economic recovery.” As thematized at the October 20–23, 2020, “Jobs Reset Summit,” a “green recovery” from the covid-19 crisis promises a “green horizon.” The WEF summit in January 2021 will specifically address the transformations that are to come. The main topics include “stable climate,” “sustainable development,” a “zero carbon” economy, and agricultural production that would reduce cattle farming in tune with the global reduction of meat consumption.
The Alternative
The rise of living standards together with the growth of the world population became possible because of the Industrial Revolution. Those who want to bring down capitalist society and the economy must necessarily opt for declining living standards and depopulation. The promoters of the plans to bring about a new world order with the force of the state negate that radical capitalism could much better provide the means to move to a better world, as has been the case since the inception of the First Industrial Revolution.
What brought about the industrial revolutions of the past were free markets and individual choice. As Mises explains, it was the laissez-faire ideology that produced the First Industrial Revolution. There was a spiritual revolution first that brought an end to “the social order in which a constantly increasing number of people were doomed to abject need and destitution” and where the manufacturing activity “had almost exclusively catered to the wants of the well-to-do” and their “expansion was limited by the amount of luxuries the wealthier strata of the population could afford.”
The ideology of the World Economic Forum is that of the preindustrial era. While the website of the forum (WEF) teems with terms like “power,” “organization,” and managed “sustainable development,” concepts like “freedom,” “market coordination,” and “individual choice” are blatantly absent. The forum hides the fact that instead of human progress, impoverishment and suppression is the future of humankind. The implicit consequence of the planned “ecological economy” is the drastic reduction of the world population.
With the abolishment of markets and the suppression of individual choice, which the collectivist plans of the WEF propound, a new dark age would come. Different from what the planners presume, technological progress itself would come to a standstill. Without the human creativity that springs from the mindset of individualism, no economic progress has ever been possible.
Conclusion
The new technologies that come with the fourth Industrial Revolution can be of immense benefit to humankind. The technologies per se are not the problem but how they are used. A dystopian future awaits us if the global elite of the World Economic Forum has its say. The result would be a technocratic terror regime masked as a benevolent world government. Yet there is an alternative. As widely proven over the past two hundred years, free markets and individual choice are the sources of technological advancement, human progress, and economic prosperity. There are no rational reasons to presume that the fourth Industrial Revolution would require collectivism. Free markets are the best way to cope with the challenges that come with new technologies. Not less but more capitalism is the answer.
Joe Biden promised amnesty for 25 million illegal aliens. He promised to tear down 400 miles of the Wall separating Mexico with America. He promised amnesty for 800,000 plus DACA illegal aliens. He promised thousands more work visas into the USA, which adds endless population surges. He promises to open the borders again to immigration from Muslim countries.
His promises will flood America with millions more desperate people from all over the world.
This interview with energy and resources specialist Dell Erickson of Minneapolis, Minnesota presents a harsh picture of America’s future that Biden expects to bequeath to Americans and our children.
The sheer numbers will shock you and the consequences will make you shrink as to the future for your children.
Mr. Erickson, please give us an idea of what our country faces as Joe Biden opens the borders to unlimited immigration:
“Immigration in the U.S. is more about the nature of this country and the Powers transforming it,” Erickson said. “It’s all about numbers.”
“I begin with immigration numbers, then immigration policies, and finally representation as the foundation of this Nation. We study the sources of immigration, effects of any Biden amnesty, and mathematically determine the implications for voting and representation, plus redistricting.
“The numbers are current or close approximations. Assumptions are as identified. Also, it is imperative to note that all lawful, amnestied immigrants, and illegal aliens, ‘refugees’, even tourists can have an instant citizen child and the child overtime, can lawfully bring its entire family to the U.S. On average they each bring 3.5 – 5 or more family members. Some 10 – 15. American citizens have no say in the matter.”
Representation in Congress
“Congress (the House) has 435 members,” said Erickson. “Congressional representation determines Federal policies, practices, rules, laws, power and control, and money flows to and from the states. The more representatives of a type, the greater the power. The House is balanced by the Senate. The catchphrase is the House “proposes”, the Senate “disposes”.
“In divided, balanced, situations, as now, the President assumes great power, power that is only restricted by the Constitution and only then if courts contest a matter. Like the President’s political party, the Attorney General is unlikely to contest the President since the AG is of the same political party. Analogously, for the States and municipalities. Others may entertain a lawsuit, but they require standing –and money!”
Changes in representation is called: redistricting.
Current U.S. population:
335,000,000
335,000,000 / 435 = 770,100 population for each representative. Note the dilution.
Immigrants and their children (2019.): 62,000,000 / 770,100 = 80.5 members of congress representing immigrants. House seats are taken from other locations. ~19% of total.
1900 U.S. population: 76,000,000
76,000,000 / 435 = 175,000 per seat.
1800 U.S. population: 5,300,000
5,300,000 / 435 = 12,200 per seat.
Determining additional representatives by immigration sources & numbers.
DACA: 800,000, assume 3.5 family members each = 2,800,000 + 800,000 = 3,600,000 total immigration, one time, not yearly.
DREAM Act-like legislation; assume 2,000,000 and family of 3.5x = 7,000,000 + 2,000,000 = 9,000,000 immigration, one time, not yearly.
Legal annual immigration. 1,000,000 3.5x family = 3,500,000 + 1,000,000 = 4,500,000 per year, every year.
Refugees. 80,000, assume family of 7x = 560,000 + 80,000 = 640,000 per year. If “refugees” at 250,000 (a ‘fair’ number?) then 1,750,000 + 250,000 = 2,000,000 every year.
Illegal aliens. Assume 50% have non-U.S. family and they each have family 4x = 11,000,000 x 4 = 44,000,000 +11,000,000 = 55,000,000 one time, over several years.
H visa family (many types). 500,000 stay per year, assume family 4x = 2,000,000 + 500,000 = 2,500,000 every year.
Student visas. 700,000 who become illegal aliens, assume % illegal overstayers of 45% (315,000), family 4x = 1,260,000 per year + 315,000 = 1,575,000 every year.
Lottery. 85,000, family 4x = 340,000 every year.
Birth Tourist visas. 33,000 per year. Assume family 5x, 165,000 + 33,000 = 198,000 yearly.
Illegal alien birth industry. 300,000 per year. 5x, 1,500,000 + 300,000 = 1,800,000 per year.
You can see from Erickson’s research that our country will become a massive refugee camp. Where the 1,000,000 legal immigrants enjoy entry, it actually turns out to be 4.5 million people as to their offspring.
The 250,000 turns out to be 2.0 million. The 500,000 illegals turns out to be 2.5 million with their birthrates. The 300,000 anchor babies grow to 1.8 million annually with their mothers and further children, year after year.
Biden will accelerate those numbers with his amnesties to the point where we will not be able to water, feed, work, educate, medicate or provide for THAT many people—along with our own citizens.
Do you understand that 335 million people today need over 1 billion meals per day? That’s three square meals a day! What happens when we have to feed 440 million as shown in the video below?
What’s going to happen? As Black, White and Hispanic Americans dwindle, we will see this country become dominated by Kenya, Ethiopia, Damascus, India, China, Pakistan and most other third world countries that flood their citizens into America.
Is that what you want for your children? Because if you do, it’s coming. If you don’t, what are you doing as a citizen to stop it?
“America’s immigration policies have launched us into a risky experiment never tried by a modern-day country,” said Dan Stein, director of the Federation of American Immigration Reform, based in Washington, DC. “What remains to be seen is if this country has the capacity to accommodate and assimilate an unending wave of mass immigration. Failure to do so will result in a balkanized, fragmented, strife-torn, overpopulated, and dysfunctional country.”
Suggestions:
Distribute these two videos to all your networks to visually show them what’s coming for their children, too:
Share these videos all over America:
In a five minute astoundingly simple yet brilliant video, “Immigration, Poverty, and Gum Balls”, Roy Beck, director of www.numbersusa.ORG, graphically illustrates the impact of overpopulation. Take five minutes to see for yourself:
“Immigration by the numbers—off the chart” by Roy Beck
This 10-minute demonstration shows Americans the results of unending mass immigration on the quality of life and sustainability for future generations: in a few words, “Mind boggling!” www.NumbersUSA.org
1) Susan Lindquist—When was she born, where was she born, and what about her early formative years?
Dr. Susan Lee Lindquist McKenzie is famous for her discoveries involving protein folding, molecular chaperones such as heat-shock proteins, prions in yeast microbes, and cancer. On June 5, 1949, Lindquist was born in Chicago, Illinois, into the home of Iver and Eleanor (Maggio) Lindquist, who were first-generation immigrants. Their aspirations for her future involved being a homemaker. Providentially, Lindquist would carve out her future by studying microbiology and biology in some of the country’s finest higher learning institutions.
Lindquist’s parents valued education, yet their daughter’s expectations were low, as was customary of the times. Lindquist herself admits to not having any career goals in her youth. Lindquist’s fifth-grade science teacher was her inspiration and influenced her way of thinking big and questioning style. Lindquist also learned techniques to cope with mild dyslexia and earned a scholarship to college. She earned her bachelor’s degree in microbiology from the University of Illinois at Urbana—Champaign in 1971.
2) Her Ph.D. was from Harvard—who did she study under, and what was her main field of interest?
Lindquist earned her Ph.D. in biology in 1976 from Harvard University. She worked in the laboratory of molecular biologist Matthew Stanley Meselson. There she studied the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, and its heat-shock proteins (Hsps)—proteins synthesized more quickly in larger quantities following cellular exposure to sudden rises in temperatures.
After earning her Ph.D., Lindquist conducted her postdoctoral research in the laboratory of Hewson Swift at the University of Chicago. In 1978, she was employed in the U of C molecular genetics and cell biology department, where she remained until 2001. Lindquist flourished in this environment and became a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and full professor in 1988 and the Albert D. Lasker Professor of Medical Sciences in 1999.
3) First, prions—what are they—why are they important?
Prions are infectious agents that cause a constellation of slowly progressive degenerative diseases of the brain. Surprisingly, the prion particles consist entirely of protein. As causative agents of ailments, it was thought early on after their discovery by Stanley Prusiner that the prions were viruses. Viruses are known to harbor nucleic acid enclosed by a protein coat. Instead, it was found that these contagious prion agents lacked any form of nucleic acids. Therefore, the prions are named as such because they are proteinaceous infectious entities.
The prion diseases constellation has been renamed transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSE). One notorious prion disease is colloquially called “mad cow disease,” known as bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Due to neurological pathology, the cattle infected by the prions and exhibiting BSE appear to have gone mad. Other potentially susceptible mammals include elk, deer, mice, cats, minks, sheep, and humans.
The sheep version of the prion disease is called “scrapie.” In addition to neurological manifestations, the sheep have an uncontrollable desire to scrape themselves against objects like fences, poles, or trees until they bleed. The prion disease-causing agent is called prion protein, “PrPSC,” in which “SC” denotes scrapie, the pathogenic form of the PrP. The standard non-pathogenic form is called the cellular prion protein. It is designated as “PrPC,” where the “C” stands for cellular. The PrPC form functions to chaperone the folding of a protein into its standard shape. However, a primary function of the PrPSC is to bind the healthy PrPC version and convert it into another PrPSC type of protein. The PrPC harbors mainly alpha-helices. The PrPSC consists primarily of beta-strands. See Figure 36, which depicts a secondary structure format.
Figure 36. Differences between secondary structures of the normal PrPC protein and scrapie prion PrPSC. (Labels have been translated to English.)
Humans can be susceptible to the prions either by infection, genetic inheritance, or sporadically. The human prion versions of the illness acquired by infection are called Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) and variant CJD. Another transmissible human version is called kuru, which emerged in New Guinea. The kuru form of the prion disease is transmitted by a cannibalistic foodborne mode in which natives of New Guinea consume their dead relatives’ brains, who succumbed to the agent. The prions embedded in their victim’s brain tissue is transferred to the cannibals, who then can acquire the kuru. Carlton Gajdusek took the Nobel prize for discovering that kuru was infectious and for developing a technique for diagnosis.
The genetic versions of the human TSE diseases include familial-CJD (f-CJD), Gerstmann-Sträussler-Scheinker (GSS) syndrome, and fatal familial insomnia (FFI). The f-CJD, GSS, and FFI disorders can involve mutations in the PrP molecule that destabilize the protein structures. The destabilized prion molecule spontaneously converts to the pathological PrPSC configuration.
Figure 37. PrPSC induces a conformational change in PrPC.
While the molecular basis of the disease pathology is far from understood, a general mechanism has emerged. See Figure 37. First, the genetically mutated prion agent produces the PrPSC, or transmission to the patient occurs. The PrPSC then aggregates abnormally into giant molecular complexes, converging on brain cells’ membrane surfaces. The normal PrPC that’s anchored to phosphatidylinositol glycan molecules on cell surfaces are converted to the pathological PrPSC shape. The neuron compensates by making more PrPC. They form long chains consisting of repeating units outside the cell. The repeats create an extracellular component called an anionic glycosaminoglycan. Then, the long chains break from the action of phagocytes and shearing forces, releasing smaller aggregates of PrPSC, which then migrate to other cells to start the process over again.
Sometimes the PrPSC molecules get taken up by brain cells and accumulate, reaching high intracellular concentrations. The buildup is problematic because when phagocytosis attempts to eliminate the accrued PrPSC aggregates, the process fails. Instead of PrPSC eradication, abnormal brain tissue vacuolation occurs. The vacuolation somehow produces the diseased brain’s spongy-like texture.
Lindquist’s involvement with prions concerned her discovery of their presence in yeast microbes. Her findings were important discoveries because yeast cell harboring prions served as a useful laboratory model system for close study of the prions’ effects in living cells. Her studies of prions in yeast organisms showed that normal cellular proteins were associated with host cells’ prion biology. In particular, Lindquist showed how the folding of protein structures of ordinary versus prion proteins had similarities in their biochemical mechanisms.
4) Heat shock proteins—what exactly are these, where are they located, and why are they important?
Heat shock proteins are found in all taxa of living organisms, from bacteria to humans. These specialized proteins are produced at a rapid rate in cells that are exposed to higher-than-normal temperatures. For a cell’s proteins to function correctly, they must be folded into specific three-dimensional shapes; otherwise, misshaped proteins cannot work. The life of the cell will be in peril.
As soon as a protein is made fresh off the translational machine, the new protein molecule arranges its linear primary sequence of amino acids into an adequately shaped 3-D configuration. Some of these 3-D shaped proteins assemble into larger quaternary complexes, forming functional molecules necessary for life. Appropriately folded proteins are an essential requirement for the living cell. Such proteins can function only when a specific molecular structure is assumed.
Presumably, the heat shock proteins function to protect cellular proteins from denaturing. When temperatures are elevated, the heat will cause proteins to unfold or misfold, causing denaturation. A denatured protein will cease to function correctly and could even be destroyed by a cell. The heat shock proteins can protect cellular proteins from denaturation after exposure to heat. Lastly, for proteins that become unfolded or heat-denatured, the heat shock factors will recover the unfolded proteins and restore them to their original shapes. Such re-shaped proteins can reacquire their cellular function, allowing the cell to continue living.
As the ribosome and its translational machinery make new proteins, the newly constructed proteins are initially unfolded. Neighboring molecules and the cell’s internal environment can influence the new proteins’ nascent nature to form misfolded structures. Thus, an improperly folded protein can malfunction or associate with inappropriate molecules to form abnormal complexes, producing deviant cellular behavior that can be detrimental to the cell.
Today, we understand that these heat shock proteins serve a general biological role called molecular chaperoning. Molecular chaperones are proteins that assist the proper folding of newly made proteins into their correct molecular shapes. Molecular chaperones positively influence a cell’s life expectancy by helping new proteins form their appropriate 3-D shapes so that they can function normally.
Figure 38. The diagram depicts molecular and cellular actions if stress is introduced to the cell.
In Figure 38, the effects of heat stress on a cell are shown. Stress induces the heat shock factor, HSF-1, which can form molecular chaperones. Cellular stresses, such as heat, can cause proteins to misfold as they denature. The molecular chaperones can influence misfolded proteins to fold correctly. However, if the misfolding is excessive, the protein will be completely degraded by a complex proteasome or through a process called autophagy, which is a debris elimination mechanism in cells.
Several of these molecular chaperones, known at the time as heat shock factors, were discovered by Lindquist during the 1980s. She first studied the heat stress behavior in fruit flies, in Drosophila melanogaster, at Harvard. Lindquist measured mRNA levels in flies that were exposed to high temperatures. As a postdoctoral fellow under Hewson Swift at the University of Chicago, Lindquist examined the translation’s efficiency in the new RNA messages in the heat- flies. She found that the protein synthesis patterns were not affected detrimentally but were altered in their translational programs. As an independent investigator and faculty at the University of Chicago, Lindquist studied the regulation patterns of protein synthesis and the intracellular locations of the proteins that emerged after heat exposures in the fruit flies.
She then compared the protein expression patterns observed in fruit flies with those in the yeast microbe called Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Lindquist discovered specific differences in heat stress responses between the fruit fly and yeast. In yeast, she found that particular RNA molecules disappeared from the microbial cells. In contrast, other RNA messages were faithfully translated into proteins. This expression phenomenon was in stark contrast to the protein expression patterns she had observed in the fruit flies. The flies had a control mechanism at play to increase specific protein production while suppressing the expression of other proteins in flies exposed to heat. In due course, Lindquist would go on to make new vital discoveries in the yeast microbes.
5) We are all vaguely familiar with yeast—but what was Susan Lindquist’s specific interest in yeast?
In yeast cells, see Figure 39, Lindquist made other startling discoveries involving heat shock proteins. One of these proteins was called Hsp90. In addition to observing that the rise in Hsp90 occurred after heat stress and helped unstable proteins fold correctly, Lindquist further discovered novel functions. She showed that Hsp90 had roles in signal transducing and developmental biology. The Hsp90 molecule worked on a completely different set of unstable mutated proteins to permit their functions to be carried out. Thus, Lindquist discovered that the Hsp90 allowed the evolution of new traits conferred by the newly stable mutated proteins. The discovery was of great importance because a heat shock protein, a chaperone, made it possible for new evolutionary adaptations to occur in novel environments.
Figure 40. Molecular protein structure of the ATPase domain in the Hsp90 chaperone, registered with 1uyi code.
Lindquist studied the molecular mechanism of Hsp90. She and colleagues examined the amino acid sequences of the Hsp90 and found homology to a critical enzyme called ATPase, see Figure 40. It was further discovered that all Hsp proteins studied thus far harbor the ATPase domain. These ATPases contain two nucleotide-binding domains, called NBDs. These new findings pointed to ATP’s hydrolysis as a biochemical mechanism for driving the protein folding abilities of molecular chaperones. Interestingly, the ATPase domain structure has been conserved in other proteins, such as histidine kinase and DNA topoisomerase II enzymes.
Lindquist made another new significant discovery involving yeast microbes. This new finding concerned another heat shock protein, a chaperone protein called Hsp104, involved in yeast stress tolerance from heat exposure. This particular discovery would shake the foundations of prion biology, a field for which Lindquist had not previously been a member. In Lindquist’s laboratory, Hsp104 untangled inactive protein aggregates, restoring their functions. While the protein function restoring the ability of a heat shock protein was not a novel result on its own, the kind of protein that was reactivated was novel. That was an incredible achievement. Lindquist discovered that Hsp104 disentangled tangled prions!
The work was met with fierce resistance by many investigators. However, Lindquist would spend the next decades providing concrete experimental evidence for yeast proteins’ prion-like behavior. The discovery had shed light on the prion hypothesis, which implied a protein-based mode of genetic inheritance.
One unclear observation involving yeast was an inherited genetic element called [PSI+] first described by Brian Cox in 1965. The [PSI+] trait was a colorful yeast phenotype that did not obey standard Mendelian genetics. Lindquist showed that the [PSI+] genetic element was a prion-like aggregation of a protein called Sup35. The Sup35 molecule is a sub-unit of a translation-release factor that makes ribosomes stop protein synthesis when reaching nonsense codons on mRNA.
Hsp104 binds to Sup35 as it is freshly made, producing a partially folded transition state, which then aggregates to form the [PSI+] element. Thus, as part of the [PSI+] complex, the Sup35 is effectively sequestered from the translational machinery. Accordingly, the sequestered Sup35 cannot terminate translation. Therefore, the translational machinery reads through the termination codon of mRNA to produce a longer protein than is usual.
However, without [PSI+] complex formation, Sup35 reverts to its normal functional state, terminating translation at the stop codon on mRNA. To precisely regulate the Sup35 incorporation into the [PSI+] element, the Hsp104 concentration must be present in precise amounts—too little or too much would mess up the [PSI+] complex formation.
As the years went by, Lindquist would discover additional prion-like behaving proteins, showing how prion-like aggregations regulated their activities. Lindquist and her laboratory students and scientists would find dozens of prions and molecular chaperones from yeast cells.
6) We must mention that Lindquist served as a mentor to many female scientists. Professor Lindquist went out of her way to provide a warm welcome to up and coming colleagues. Can you name a few?
Dr. Susan Lindquist mentored generations of female students and postdoctoral fellows throughout her scientific career. Lindquist was a tremendously encouraging advocate for female colleagues, many of whom looked up to her as an influential and positive role model. Many of these fledgling scientists went on to become quite prominent independent investigators. For instance, Dr. Bonnie L. Bassler, a noted molecular biologist interested in bacterial quorum sensing at Princeton University, attributed much of her success to Lindquist’s mentorship. Dr. Bassler would become Squibb Professor, an endowed post, and chair of the molecular biology department at Princeton.
Another mentee, Dr. Dianne K. Newman, an endowed Binder and Amgen professor of biology and geobiology at Caltech, was motivated by Lindquist’s example of a stellar scientific investigator. Lindquist deeply inspired Newman. Likewise, Dr. Brit D’Arbeloff recalled that Lindquist’s career advice influenced her and her husband to pursue their investigations at the Whitehead Institute.
Lindquist’s publications were inspiring to young molecular biologists. Neurobiologist Dr. Cori Bargmann remembered reading Lindquist’s creatively brilliant scientific 1998 paper on Hsp90 functioning like a capacitor for directing molecular evolution as one of her favorite articles. The report would influence many to study misfolded proteins and their relationships to human neurodegenerative illnesses.
Many of Lindquist’s students and mentees were quite appreciative of her efforts to train them in the scientific method. Lindquist was awarded the Vanderbilt Prize for Women’s Excellence in Science and Mentorship 2014. It is an utmostly fitting tribute to a fine scientist.
She was honored in other ways. She was bestowed the President’s National Medal of Science in 2009, awarded by President Barack Obama. She was awarded the Dickson Prize in Medicine in 2003, the Otto-Warburg Prize in 2008, the Genetics Society of America Medal in 2008, the FASEB Excellence in Science Award in 2009, the Max Delbrück Medal in 2010, the Mendel Medal in 2010, the E.B. Wilson Medal in 2012, the Vallee Visiting Professorship in 2015, and the Albany Prize in 2016.
Lindquist was also elected as a member of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Medicine, the American Philosophical Society, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the British Royal Society.
7) She was the Director of the Whitehead Institute—from 2001 to 2004—What exactly is the Whitehead Institute, see Figure 41, what gets researched there? And what did she investigate there?
Figure 41. The Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research (left building) in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
From 2001 until 2004, Lindquist became a biology department professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). While there, she served as the Director of the MIT-affiliated Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research until her death. She guided over 100 postdoctoral fellows at the Whitehead Institute, graduate students, and undergraduates to fruitful research careers.
In her laboratory, Lindquist examined the transcriptional response to heat stress and investigated induced proteins: molecular chaperones. She was captivated because, although all eukaryotic cells placed at an extreme temperature perish, those same cells survived if first exposed to an intermediate temperature. Lindquist’s laboratory showed a genetic program that responds to this, and other stresses are activated in all cells. Thus, she embarked on her career studying heat-shock factors whose functions made the difference between life and death after stressor exposures.
Lindquist and her laboratory at Whitehead pioneered new studies devoted to folding newly formed proteins in the cell. She had discovered a variety of heat shock factors, called Hsp, with each one given a number attesting to their molecular weights. For instance, she found that the chaperones, such as Hsp90, enhance and buffer potentially detrimental outcomes from genetic variation. Thus, the heat shock chaperone factors drove evolutionary processes. These evolution-based systems ranged from cellular transformation during malignant cell tumorigenesis to the emergence of microbial resistance factors against antimicrobial agents.
Lindquist’s scientific contributions also definitively established the cellular and molecular bases for protein-based avenues of inheritance, to transfer new traits to subsequent generations of organisms, a controversial hypothesis. Lindquist also implied that the molecular chaperones and the prions each confer unique but potential mechanisms for Lamarckian-like modes of inheritance.
The molecular processes involved in folding proteins can occasionally go awry. The consequence of aberrant folding, called misfolding, has been invoked to explain neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease, cystic fibrosis, Parkinson’s disease, and Huntington’s disease chorea. Protein misfolding can also play roles in illnesses of cancer. Specific proteins that have malformed their molecular structures, such as the prions, actively seek and attack the brain’s neurons to confer transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Consequently, these abnormalities produce diseases Creutzfeldt-Jakob in humans and scrapie in sheep and mad cow disease in bovines.
8) Although she never received a Nobel, she seemed to enjoy her research, the collegiality and cordial relationship Lindquist had with colleagues—What was she like as a person?
A distinctive and characteristic attribute that has been noted about Lindquist was her mentorship. Her mentees reported that Lindquist took great care to teach younger people to write and communicate scientific findings. Her colleagues recognized Lindquist as a talented and gifted scientific communicator. She possessed a rare ability to explain molecular biology unambiguously.
Lindquist, Figure 42, was remembered as a bit absentminded when it came to everyday things. For example, in 2006, there was a meeting about Protein Folding in Vermont. Lindquist had accidentally left her computer at home. Since her colleagues were already on their way to the conference and could not bring her laptop, an alternate plan to deliver the forgotten laptop involved a helicopter. Luckily, the computer arrived just in time, and the conference-goers watched in astonishment as Lindquist retrieved her computer.
The positive influence of Dr. Susan Lindquist was powerful. She was recalled fondly by Dr. Rita Colwell, who became the first female Director of the prestigious National Science Foundation. Dr. Colwell would write that Lindquist will be long remembered for her significant mentorship towards younger female scientists. Her commitment to advancing education in the STEM fields was unparalleled. Further, Colwell stated, Dr. Lindquist would be commemorated for many scientific contributions for the ultimate betterment of humanity.
9) Sadly, she passed at age 67—and again, sadly, from cancer—what had she spent a lot of her time studying?
Before her death, Lindquist studied cancer. On October 27, 2016, she died in Boston, Massachusetts, from ovarian cancer at 67 years of age.
Intriguingly, her work with the heat shock proteins had a direct relationship to studies of cancer. During tumor cell formation, the protective effects of the heat shock proteins are subverted. Thus, compromising molecular chaperones’ functions can facilitate carcinogenesis by converting benign tumors to malignant ones.
Conversely, molecular chaperones, such as Hsp90, present in tumorous tissues, permit mutated proteins to maintain function. The refolding of mutant proteins can allow cancers to regulate imbalanced signaling that is induced by oncogenic proteins. Investigators are actively pursuing studies on cancer cell function by using Hsp90 inhibitors.
These modulatory agents, as they become available, are applicable in cancer chemotherapy. Thus, improving the Hsp90 chaperone inhibitors’ pharmacological activities is an active field of anti-cancer therapy. New work that combines conventional anti-cancer agents with Hsp90 inhibitors is a promising avenue. Maybe these chaperones can guide cancer cells to become normal cells.
Learn more about Dr. Lindquist’s work in her own words. Some of her lectures and interviews are listed below.
According to a new Gallup poll, more than half of Americans will refuse to comply with new virus lockdowns. In the new poll, 49% of respondents said they’ll be very likely to stay home, when in the spring time that number was 67%, according to a CNN poll.
Coronavirus? What’s this thing you speak of? I vaguely remember a virus that went around in early 2020. That was the year the Democrats tried to cheat Donald Trump out of a second term in the White House. Do you remember? Yeah, I seem to recall a doctor that put the fear of God into elderly people and citizens that had underlying health conditions, and then do you remember how we later found out that doctor had a financial stake in the game and it later came to light that he didn’t even believe what he was saying as he told the entire country they should wear a mask, but then he went to a major league baseball game and as the cameras panned the stadium, there he was. There he was right next to his buddies with no mask on.
Yeah, that was the game I think he threw out the first pitch. Oh yeah, the COVID, that’s what they called it.
And then, what was that woman’s name? That crazy one? Remember her, the Speaker of the House? Nancy…Nancy Pelosi yes, she REALLY shed light on the importance of lockdowns and masking I mean she was the one that proved how dangerous the virus was for anyone that wanted to get together over the summer, go out to eat or have some drinks with your buddies, remember she was a mask nut job! She was like Lenin with those masks I think she even had some masking police my God she was REALLY convinced that virus was going to take us all down I mean she shut down restaurants and gyms… in California, you couldn’t even get a haircut, I mean she shut down salons!…and then, she was busted and exposed as a complete fraud and a liar after a hair salon owner leaked footage of her getting her wig blown out with no mask on. Yeah, that was crazy…those were crazy times. 2020…what a year.
Do you think this new information we’re seeing in these sliding restriction compliance numbers could have something to do with the the forgotten details?
Could this be a reaction to the little things the media leaves out as they blast COVID relentlessly through our televisions and into our living rooms reminding us that over 80 million people have been infected and 200,000 have died? Tragic, of course, but I don’t believe you. I’ll get to that in a minute, but I mean…So, when people do that math and realize the survivability is over 99%, when they realize that they actually have a better chance of becoming a millionaire from a scratch off, do you think they may be ready to roll the dice with the virus to prevent losing everything they’ve ever worked for? I mean, the likelihood that your business will close down permanently without any customers is about the same percentage…about 99.9%. Restaurants and bars don’t seem to do well when they’re not serving food and slinging drinks. My barber tells me she can’t make any money without someone sitting in her chair. I was blown away. I couldn’t believe it when I heard that kids weren’t learning as much as a result of not being in school…that really shocked the hell out of me!
Suicides are going through he roof as people lose it all, kids aren’t able to report to their school counselor how their uncle is touching their pee pees or how their mom puts her cigarette out on their sister when she’s drunk…. Yeah, child abuse and youth deaths are tragically becoming a part of this ‘new normal’ these progressives keep telling me I’m supposed to accept and I’ll have to get used to. Yeah, the ‘new normal’. The new normal that forced an immigrant woman to shut the doors on her newly opened business after she risked it all to flee her third world country to escape real oppression, and start her new life in the United States because we have a Constitution that guarantees her the protection from a tyrannical government, the promise of equality and the right to be free…do you think any of this weighs on the minds of these people giving the middle finger to radical power hungry liberal Democrats like Tim Walz in Minnesota or Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan?
When Americans realize that these mandates really have nothing to do with safety and health, but everything to do with compliance and control, is it really supposed to shock or disturb us when they tell the government to get bent?
Am I supposed to believe the same media that suppressed the biggest story in our lifetime about how a father used his son as a money mule to cash out on a Ponzi scheme with foreign adversaries to this country as he compromised the national security of America and sold us out as the Vice President of the United States? The same media that prematurely called an election for the highest office in the world, ignoring the fact that no state had certified their poll numbers, massive fraud is suspected and men married to Democratic senators sit on the board of directors of a computer company that supposedly mistakingly glitched taking votes away from Donald Trump and giving them to Joe Biden?
You know, so forgive me if I don’t cower before my master, cover my face with a mask that isn’t backed up by any scientific data, close down my business and lock myself inside for the winter because I’m told to by the same people who’ve attempted multiple times to unseat a duly elected president by manufacturing lies about racism, misogyny and Ukrainian phone calls while corrupt establishment deep state politicians organize a fourth attempt at a coup de’ etat.
Meanwhile, the president they blame for the virus was the only one willing to act immediately to curb the spread when he shut down travel from the country that manufactured the damn thing and the same president that deregulated the hell out of drug makers so rather than six years of bureaucratic red tape and lobbyist pay to play to get medicine on the market, a vaccine is ready to go in just months…only to be shut down by sickos like Andrew Cuomo, who has said he’s actually ready to let front line medical workers and your grandmother die rather than allowing them to acquire the vaccination as he trades lives for political optics.
I don’t know about you, but I’m part of the majority. You can throw me in jail.
“What I like most about the film, in relation to its production process, is discovering how the different parts are related to each other.” – Alex Piperno
In Alex Piperno’s Window Boy Would Also Like to Have a Submarine, doors never lead to where they’re supposed to. A young sailor on a cruise ship off the coast of Patagonia stumbles upon a magical doorway that leads to a woman’s apartment in Montevideo. Meanwhile, a group of Filipino farmers discover an abandoned shed in the valley that holds supernatural powers. These two stories will merge in Piperno’s film and allow people in different parts of the world to enter one another’s spaces.
Alex Piperno, was born in Montevideo. He studied Film Directing at the Universidad del Cine de Buenos Aires. Following a series of short films, Piperno directed the Hubert Bals Fund supported Window Boy Would Also Like to Have a Submarine. His feature debut had its world premiere at the Berlinale in 2020. The film was nominated for the International New Talent Competition at the Taipei Film Festival, The International Competition at Jeonju Film Festival, and the Best First Feature Award at the Berlin International Film Festival.
The Global Search for Educationis pleased to welcome the film’s Director, Alex Piperno.
“As a spectator, my favorite part is the end of the film, when everything ends up mixing and that leads to catastrophe.” – Alex Piperno
Alex, tell us what you like most about your film and also what audience feedback you’ve received. Is there anything in your production process that you would do differently?
What I like most about the film, in relation to its production process, is discovering how the different parts are related to each other. They are not ideas that I came up with. I experienced that discovery and surprise in the process, and that is my greatest joy as a director. This happened during the script writing, but also during shooting, editing and sound design. In each of the stages, with different materials, I discover how old notes enter in relation to other notes, how frames leave doors open for someone to enter or not, how a shot in one scene works differently in another scene, what happens when this or that sound comes in, and thus the film becomes a system of opacities and transparencies that drives me crazy and keeps me fascinated during the different stages. As a spectator, my favorite part is the end of the film, when everything ends up mixing, and that leads to catastrophe.
Regarding the feedback from the audience, the Q&A experience at the Berlinale was deeply moving for me. The conversation with the audience was warm, stimulating, and extensive, and while I had no prior thoughts, it was unsettling for me to discover the spectators appropriating the film. There may be no other way, but it is my first film and I have not experienced that feeling before. After so many years, with so many moments of uncertainty and loneliness, putting the film on the table like a fruit and seeing how each one grabbed his own piece was wonderful. And I especially remember this: I would enter the theatre towards the end of each screening and I would wait at the entrance, and at one point, always the same, I would hear the audience giggling. It was not a time to laugh, I thought so, but the audience was laughing. There I understood that I had nothing more to do with the film and that was a great relief.
In relation to what things in the production process would I do differently: everything.
People have referred to your movie as “a globalized fairytale”. In what ways do you think the characters and the locations in your movie might inspire the audience to reflect on some of these relevant societal themes?
I think the film does not talk about but works with. It is true that its materials are peripheral characters and places located in the antipodes, that these places become close and that the world ends up turning inside out like a sock. But the characters cannot communicate with each other, that is, the distance between them is not elided. I don’t know if I am interested in globalization as a topic. I do know that I am interested in the characters that watch, and I understand that in order to watch they have to be outside the thing, on the periphery. I also know that when I went to the cruise ship and framed the tourists, I felt a lot of rejection, and that when I panned to one side and the space was empty, I felt much better. I know that in a film, I prefer silence to bustle, that I like characters who do not know what to do and who are ashamed of themselves and are pushed by circumstances. I know that I hate the idea of work and that I am moved by the poetic function of language, that is, impertinence, humor, surprise, diagonals, frame within frame compositions. All this will make one type of film appear instead of another.
“In relation to what things in the production process would I do differently: everything!” – Alex Piperno
Funding and especially funding during a pandemic – what lessons did you learn from the process? What advice would you give to other young filmmakers trying to raise money for their first film?
The development of the film began at the end of 2011. I had screened that year the short film The Inviolability of the Domicile which is based on the man who appears wielding an ax at the door of his house during the Cannes Critics’ Week, which I imagine must have helped the project to be considered more carefully. The film was selected in a script workshop called Taller Colón along with other projects by Latin American directors, who later became very dear friends. The following year the film obtained its first development funds, from ICAU (Uruguay) and the Hubert Bals Fund, which was essential for me to dedicate myself seriously to its development. I had decided to be the majority co-producer on the Uruguayan side and I conceived the film as a co-production between Uruguay and Argentina. I associated with my beloved Lukas Rinner, who at that time was taking his first steps with his production company Nabis Argentina. We began to be selected for different laboratories and markets, such as Bafici Bal, San Sebastián Co-production Forum and Berlinale Script-station, among others. The truth is that we had no idea how to produce a feature film, much less this one in particular.
Years passed and we could not obtain any production funds. Then we applied to the Uruguay and Brazil co-production fund and obtained our first production fund. Meanwhile, we continued applying to national and international funds without luck. My life had been reduced to trying to carry this film forward and I felt that the film was getting stuck in a well and myself with it. We were still applying to laboratories. The search for financing for production lasted until 2017.
In 2014 Lukas shot his first feature film and we decided that it was best for him to open up about the project. He was replaced by Argentine producers Esteban Lucangioli and Araquén Rodríguez, from Pelícano production company. In those years we obtained INCAA production fund (Argentina), IBERMEDIA co-production fund, NFF + HBF from Netherlands (joining the project the producer Frank Hoeve, from Baldr Film), a municipal production fund from Montevideo (Uruguay) and, at the last moment, ICAU production fund (Uruguay), which finally allowed us to start the production. The staged shooting strategy, which was the condition of possibility of the film and that extended from 2017 to 2019, also involved going through a severe devaluation of the Latin American economy. The funds obtained in our national institutes, which are granted in local currency and staggered in installments, were devalued in some cases above 70%. The film was made possible with the entry of the Philippine producer Armi Rae Cacanindin to the co-production team, and with a very significant effort in time and money from all the production companies, to which I am eternally grateful.
This whole process was very formative for me. It was a ten-year process of many “first times”.
An incredible journey for sure.
Yes, I had to learn how to write a film, how to produce a film, how to direct a film. Naturally, having had the experience, I would do things differently. For example, the most important thing is to find your own way and defend it from common sense. Cinema is such a normed, hierarchical, collective and expensive discipline that it can pass over you. The crew need urgent definitions that many times I cannot give them and it is necessary to be able to deal with that, with the chronometer running and without fully understanding what I am doing. I was very afraid that the common sense of the shooting would win me over, because I knew that would be a disaster for the film. Finding out what my times and priorities were and learning to trust them in the midst of that fire was the hardest thing for me. So it seems to me very important to be able to invent a production system that can be solidary with the way one has to face a film. Because the traditional way of production rejects any possibility of doubting, playing or making mistakes, and at the end of the day, these are our most valuable working tools.
“The traditional way of production rejects any possibility of doubting, playing or making mistakes, and at the end of the day, these are our most valuable working tools.” – Alex Piperno
Where can audiences see Window Boy Would Also Like to Have a Submarine?
The film was released in the last days of the pre-covid era and we had a beautiful schedule of international festivals and premieres in confirmed theaters that exploded in the air and we still continue putting together the broken pieces of all this. The film is now available on IFFR Unleashed, the VOD platform of the Rotterdam Festival, exclusively for the Benelux territory. We continue to prioritize the screenings in festivals and theatres, because the film is, as it is said – or as it used to be said – a film “to watch in the theatre”.
Thank you Alex
C.M. Rubin and Ben Stassen
Thank you to our 800 plus global contributors, artists, teachers, entrepreneurs, researchers, business leaders, students and thought leaders from every domain for sharing your perspectives on the future of learning with The Global Search for Education each month.
C. M. Rubin (Cathy) is the Founder of CMRubinWorld, an online publishing company focused on the future of global learning, and the co-founder of Planet Classroom. She is the author of three best-selling books and two widely read online series. Rubin received 3 Upton Sinclair Awards for “The Global Search for Education.” The series, which advocates for Youth, was launched in 2010 and brings together distinguished thought leaders from around the world to explore the key education issues faced by nations.
Rob Pue
Antony P. Mueller
