Robe rapiécée de saint François d'Assise. Ayant argumenté que l'Arlequin soit dans sa forme un personnage d'influence soufie, spécialement d'après le port de la robe rapiécée des maîtres derviches du xie siècle, Idries Shah a également consacré un chapitre de son ouvrage de référence à l'influence soufie sur Saint François d'Assise, dont la robe rapiécée est pour lui un des nombreux exemples. (Shah, I. The Sufis The Octagon Press:1999 p. 228 et suivantes). https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlequin#/media/File:Habito_de_s_francisco.jpg
A voir egalement: Pierrot A Critical History of a Mask Robert F. Storey
Voters are divided on whether what Trump said in that recording is, as he put it, "typical locker room talk." About 4-in-10 (39%) agree with Trump that most men say these kinds of things while a similar 40% say few men actually engage in this type of "banter." There is a huge split in opinion based on which candidate voters are supporting. The vast majority of Clinton backers (66%) say that few men use this type of language, including 69% of men and 64% of women who support Clinton. This result is flipped on its head among voters who support Trump - 69% say most men actually talk like this, including 69% of men and 69% of women who back Trump.
"This is a chicken and egg problem. Is Trump's base really comprised almost entirely of voters who engage in or condone the kind of sexually aggressive language he used? Or are his voters constructing a post hoc defense of Trump to rationalize their continued support of him? It's really not clear, but either way it speaks to the divisiveness that has characterized this election," said Murray.
When reading about all the different women who have come forward with their stories--or testimony--of sexual groping and unwanted physical attack, I am struck by one thing: They did not say or do anything at the time, though in a state of shock, pain, and confusion because they felt they would not be believed. As a person of color, I have been repeatedly verbally and physically abused--not by primarily Caucasians (although that has happened) but by African-Americans (as opposed to African immigrants) in the United States. And the reason I have not "reported" these attacks--other than mostly on these blogs--is because I am afraid of the consequences: people blaming or not believing me. Europeans seem to be quite naive about race relations in the U.S., falling into an idealization of African-Americans that does not correspond to the reality (of dysfunctional and destructive behaviors). Throughout my life I have African-Americans use language quite similar to Donald Trump's (Access Hollywood)..."foul" and/or lewd and/or aggressive language. Minorities should not "get a break" just because they are minorities. # # # # #
Donald Trump on his private plane.CreditDamon Winter/The New York Times
The point of town hall debates is that regular voters get to ask questions. In every town hall I’ve seen, the candidate turns to the voter, listens attentively and directs the answer at least partially back to that person.
The candidates do that because it’s polite, because it looks good to be seen taking others seriously and because most of us instinctively want to make some connection with the people we are talking to.
Hillary Clinton, not exactly a paragon of intimacy, behaved in the normal manner on Sunday night. But Donald Trump did not. Trump treated his questioners as unrelatable automatons and delivered his answers to the void, even when he had the chance to seem sympathetic to an appealing young Islamic woman.
That underlines the essential loneliness of Donald Trump.
Politics is an effort to make human connection, but Trump seems incapable of that. He is essentially adviser-less, friendless. His campaign team is made up of cold mercenaries at best and Roger Ailes at worst. His party treats him as a stench it can’t yet remove.
He was a germophobe through most of his life and cut off contact with others, and now I just picture him alone in the middle of the night, tweeting out hatred.
Trump breaks his own world record for being appalling on a weekly basis, but as the campaign sinks to new low after new low, I find myself experiencing feelings of deep sadness and pity.
Imagine if you had to go through a single day without sharing kind little moments with strangers and friends.
Imagine if you had to endure a single week in a hate-filled world, crowded with enemies of your own making, the object of disgust and derision.
You would be a twisted, tortured shrivel, too, and maybe you’d lash out and try to take cruel revenge on the universe. For Trump this is his whole life.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter
Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Trump continues to display the symptoms of narcissistic alexithymia, the inability to understand or describe the emotions in the self. Unable to know themselves, sufferers are unable to understand, relate or attach to others.
To prove their own existence, they hunger for endless attention from outside. Lacking internal measures of their own worth, they rely on external but insecure criteria like wealth, beauty, fame and others’ submission.
In this way, Trump seems to be denied all the pleasures that go with friendship and cooperation. Women could be sources of love and affection, but in his disordered state he can only hate and demean them. His attempts at intimacy are gruesome parodies, lunging at women as if they were pieces of meat.
Most of us derive a warm satisfaction when we feel our lives are aligned with ultimate values. But Trump lives in an alternative, amoral Howard Stern universe where he cannot enjoy the sweetness that altruism and community service can occasionally bring.
Bullies only experience peace when they are cruel. Their blood pressure drops the moment they beat the kid on the playground.
Imagine you are Trump. You are trying to bluff your way through a debate. You’re running for an office you’re completely unqualified for. You are chasing some glimmer of validation that recedes ever further from view.
Your only rest comes when you are insulting somebody, when you are threatening to throw your opponent in jail, when you are looming over her menacingly like a mafioso thug on the precipice of a hit, when you are bellowing that she has “tremendous hate in her heart” when it is clear to everyone you are only projecting what is in your own.
Trump’s emotional makeup means he can hit only a few notes: fury and aggression. In some ways, his debate performances look like primate dominance displays — filled with chest beating and looming growls. But at least primates have bands to connect with, whereas Trump is so alone, if a tree fell in his emotional forest, it would not make a sound.
It’s all so pathetic.
On Monday, one of Trump’s conservative critics, Erick Erickson, published a moving essay called “If I Die Before You Wake… .” Erickson has been the object of vicious assaults by Trump supporters. He and his wife are both facing serious health ailments and may pass before their children are grown. Yet as the essay makes clear, both are living lives of love, faith, devotion and service. Both have an ultimate confidence in the goodness of creation and their grace-filled place in it.
You may share that faith or not, but Erickson is living an attached life — emotionally, spiritually, morally and communally. Donald Trump’s life, by contrast, looks superficially successful and profoundly miserable. None of us would want to live in the howling wilderness of his own solitude, no matter how thick the gilding.
On Nov. 9, the day after Trump loses, there won’t be solidarity and howls of outrage. Everyone will just walk away.
Nearly two-thirds of U.S. gun deaths each year are suicides, which are particularly common among older white men. The group most at risk of dying by gun homicide, meanwhile, are young black men. Earlier this year, FiveThirtyEight took a hard look at the more than 33,000 gun deaths that take place in the U.S. each year, and we tried to understand what could help bring that number down. Among the key statistics: Nearly two-thirds of U.S. gun deaths each year are suicides, which are particularly common among older white men. The group most at risk of dying by gun homicide, meanwhile, are young black men. Addressing those two problems, and others such as domestic violence, require very different solutions. Explore all our stories and our interactive graphic for more on what we learned. from a politically liberal site: http://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/second-presidential-debate-election-2016/?ex_cid=2016-forecast
INTERNATIONAL - L'intervention de Julian Assange ce mardi 4 octobre devrait être particulièrement suivie... notamment par l'équipe de campagne d'Hillary Clinton. Le fondateur de Wikileaks, qui doit faire une déclaration à l'occasion du dixième anniversaire de son organisation, dit depuis plusieurs semaines son intention de publier des documents compromettants sur la candidate démocrate à l'élection présidentielle américaine.
Réfugié dans l’ambassade de l'Équateur à Londres depuis 2012 pour éviter son extradition en Suède, Julian Assange doit prendre la parole lors d'une conférence de presse retransmise en direct par vidéo à Berlin. Les modalités de son intervention, initialement prévue depuis le balcon de l'ambassade londonienne d'où il s'est plusieurs fois exprimé, ont été revues pour des "raisons de sécurité" selon le Daily Mail. Sur Twitter, Wikileaks dit avoir reçu une "information précise" motivant ce changement de dernière minute.
Le fondateur de l'ONG Wikileaks, spécialisée dans la publication de documents censés rester confidentiels, avait affirmé fin août que de nouveaux documents liés à Hillary Clinton seraient publiés avant le scrutin du 8 novembre, et pourraient avoir un effet "important" sur l'élection.
L'Australien, réclamé par les autorités suédoises dans une affaire de viol, avait indiqué sur la chaîne Fox News que Wikileaks était en train de passer au crible des milliers de pages de documents.
Un certain nombre de ces documents, provenant de différentes institutions ayant un rapport avec la campagne électorale, ont révélé "des angles assez inattendus, qui sont assez intéressants, certains sont même divertissants", avait-il expliqué. Il a assuré que ces documents seraient "absolument" rendus publics avant le scrutin présidentiel prévu le 8 novembre.
"On ne pourrait pas simplement attaquer cet homme avec un drone?"
Et Wikileaks a commencé à mettre ces menaces à exécution ce lundi. Sur son compte Twitter, l'organisation a ainsi partagé un article de True Pundit -un site ouvertement pro-républicains et relayant parfois des faits considérés par certains médias traditionnels comme des théories conspirationnistes- expliquant qu'Hillary Clinton, alors Secrétaire d'État, avait organisé une réunion dont le but était de faire taire Assange coûte que coûte.
Ce 23 novembre 2010, au Département d'État américain, Hillary Clinton aurait ainsi envisagé d'attaquer Julian Assange à l'aide d'un drone, ou encore d'offrir une récompense de 10 millions de dollars à celui qui capturerait et extraderait le fondateur de Wikileaks vers les États-Unis. La Secrétaire d'État aurait ainsi voulu l'empêcher de diffuser de nouvelles informations après le big bang du "Cable gate" et la révélation de centaines de milliers de télégrammes de la diplomatie américaine entre 2010 et 2011.
Quelques jours plus tard, Julian Assange avait fait savoir que Wikileaks détenait "davantage de documents liés à la campagne de Hillary Clinton", laissant entendre qu'une nouvelle fuite pouvait être à prévoir. "Ils sont extrêmement intéressants", avait-il relevé. "Nous verrons en temps voulu ce qu'il en adviendra".
Interrogé par Fox News pour savoir si ces futures révélations pourraient affecter le scrutin, Julian Assange a répondu: "Je pense que c'est important. Ça dépend de comment ça s'enflamme dans le public et les médias".
"Dans le cas du DNC par exemple, nous avons fait aussi vite que possible pour essayer de le faire sortir avant la convention d'investiture démocrate, parce qu'évidemment, les gens avaient le droit de comprendre qui ils allaient investir", a-t-il justifié. "C'est valable aussi pour le processus électoral américain".
Julian Assange avait refusé fin juillet de révéler comment Wikileaks avait obtenu les messages piratés rendus publics avant la convention démocrate. La Russie est soupçonnée par de nombreux experts et responsables d'en être l'instigatrice -ce que n'a pas écarté non plus le président Barack Obama- mais Moscou a démenti toute intervention.
