Interesting to see the establishment media begin to cope with protests outside the political process they control. The venerable New York Times has an opinion piece up today, poking at the nascent movement. The writer reminds me of one of Kubrick’s monkeys, working his courage up to touch the monolith in 2001 A Space Odyssey.
Charles Blow’s Hippies and Hipsters Exhale ranges from making fun of the Occupy Wall Street protest — pointing out that the protestors amused themselves with face-painting and pillow fights — to fretting about the idea that the protestors on Wall Street might represent the avante garde of a completely disillusioned American majority. Blow’s “sage” advice to the protestors? Join the political process. Come be co-opted. Step right up.
Of course, Blow completely misses or chooses to ignore the point to protests like Occupy Wall Street — fast becoming Occupy Your Street (Any Street) — and October 2011, coming soon to Freedom Plaza in Washington, D.C. The protestors have rejected politics. They are wide awake. They no longer believe a political solution to America’s problems is possible. They are determined to win or lose in the streets, and they are committed to the notion that culture trumps politics. (Think of the beginnings of the Civil Rights Movement and the anti-war, anti-draft movement that ended the Vietnam War and the Johnson Presidency at the price of undermining The Great Society and opening the door of the Oval Office for Richard Nixon.) The way, we used to say, the cookie crumbles.
When I came home from the Army in the late Sixties, I spent a lot of time, lounging around and arguing with a good friend — a Marcusian who had ditched his Swiss name for “Baptiste” — about whether everything was politics — his idea — or everything was culture. I’ve never been more convinced I was right. Politicians, like everyone else, swim in the sea of mass culture. Political movements emerge and ride the wave of mass culture for a while, then sink back into the sea. It is impossible to imagine the New Deal outside a culture that valued people and the idea of society, just as it is impossible to imagine the Civil Rights Movement and the anti-war protests that followed outside the Counter Culture of the Sixties and Seventies — precisely the culture Blow derides in the title of his essay.
The real question is: Can the emerging protest movements stay alive in the absence of something like the Counter Culture of the Sixties? Has enough work been done to build a culture of dissent to sustain them?
When I was a graduate student at the University of Texas, the UT School of Communication, together with Stanford University, hosted a week-long seminar every year at Pebble Beach. The schools brought a handful of graduate students and professors to Pebble Beach to spend a week with the leaders of the mainstream media. The kicker — the brainchild of Stanley Donner — was that the “leaders” who were invited to the seminars were the number two men and women of the broadcast industry. The men and women UT and Stanford figured had the best shot at grabbing power and doing something different when they did. The theory was that the last people in the world who would shake things up were the people in charge. If you wanted to talk to somebody in the industry about doing something better, the person you needed to get to was the heir apparent.
The problem with the American political system now is that not only the leaders, but all of the possible pretenders to positions of leadership — to political office, you see — have been vetted by an establishment process that has eliminated the possibility that any anti-establishment — read anti-Wall Street and anti-Corporate — idea will work its way into the political process. The culture just isn’t there to sustain it.
Billy Glad blogs at Annals Of The Hive




55 Comments

In some ways, I guess the counter-culture movement of the Sixties can be described as a cultural revolution born of disgust with the total conformity and hypocrisy insisted upon, at least within the white community, in the Fifties. It definitely WAS a revolution, and was so described by both its advocates and detractors at the time.
In many ways, the election of Ronald Reagan was a backlash against the successes of the cultural revolution which didn’t really become dominant until the Seventies. But politics was never far away from the arguments of those days.
I’m not sure one can separate culture from politics, or even if one should try. To me, politics is just the art of persuading other people to do what you want them to do, an admittedly broad definition. I’m not sure what you mean when you say “politics” or “culture,” Billy. And I went to the same university you did.
I don’t see the Occupy Wall Street or October 6 movements as rejecting politics at all; rather they are applying direct action to force political change because necessary political change will not happen within the current political system. In the process they will, if they are successful, change the cultural climate to allow dissent as well. I hope they succeed.
Now, both politics AND culture are dominated by corporate interests. Just try walking through a crowd of people and NOT seeing a corporate logo somewhere. American politics has been subverted by this meme of “America=freedom=corporate profits” and anything or anyone who speaks out against it must be The Enemy. In the fifties and sixties, The Enemy was Communism, now it is Terrorism=Islam=Anyone Who Doesn’t Wave The Flag And Say America Is #1.
That dominant cultural theme must be, and I think will be, discredited because it doesn’t work any more than “Father Knows Best” did. Then the politics will follow.
Let me use another analogy to see if I understand you, Billy. Do you think the cultural change during the Enlightenment made the American and French Revolutions possible? Am I on the right track here?
I hadn’t thought of the Enlightenment when I scribbled the post, but it’s hard to separate Lockean democracy from the Revolution, Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Locke’s concept of independent atoms, glomming together to form government was probably something that had to be overcome before society could emerge as the main meme of the New Deal. Now we have these super — my daughter would say über — molecules the atoms coalesce around — corporations, unions, political parties — but the idea of “society” has lost its meaning. Thanks for the read and the thoughtful comment.
recommended and tweeted
Very thoughtful and interesting post indeed Billy Glad.
To me, that is what makes the Occupy Wall Street protest so exciting and full of hope and also very fragile. It is an organic movement and it appears to me individuals and smaller groups of individuals are breaking away from the more or less ossified/established groups (unions, political parties) and glomming onto the Occupy Wall Street blob which I would define as very much like a large one-celled creature that is currently being fed and replenished by the emotional protoplasm of anger. [Of course there is no way in hell that we can expect many if any breakaways from the Wall Street groups--perhaps a few from the outer edges, but not too many]
This is why I think it is important that Occupy Wall Street doesn’t have 1.2.3. plan yet. Plans tend to gel things, ‘set them in stone”, etc. A movement without a plan means that its cell membrane will be highly permeable and inviting. The emotional protoplasm of anger is the magnet that is attracting like elements for the moment.
Occupy Wall Street has all the potential for developing from a protest into a political movement. It is still growing. It is very interesting.
Not only the idea of society has lost its meaning, but the idea of community has been under relentless corporate attack for decades. It’s the old ploy: divide and rule. When people come together united in the common interests of their communities, they will often oppose measures that increase corporate profit-making.
Therefore, according to the corporatists, “community” or the concept of anything held “in common” for the general public good, is abomination and must be destroyed. They don’t usually dare to label it “anti-capitalist,” so they just use “anti-American.” They seek to replace it with faux patriotism, which they aggressively market.
Which reminds me(this is a bit off topic), I went to the Browns game last Sunday. The time came for the national anthem. I resolved not to take off my hat. I stood, and the guy behind me actually swatted the back of my head and said “take it off, man.” At first, I was pissed and felt my barbarian Viking(Nordic ancestry, not the team)blood rising. Then I remembered. I’m a veteran. According to new protocols, I don’t HAVE to take off my hat.
Problem solved. Potential altercation over. And I got to watch a great drive for a winning touchdown in the last minute of the game, led by our former Longhorn, Colt McCoy. It was great fun.
I like to argue with my MBA office mate about how the MBA has destroyed the country. I argue that the exclusive focus on the economics of business excludes the vital role of the political. You don’t have a nation state without politics. I don’t believe you can divorce culture from politics. They go together. Values grow from culture and politics provides a means for values to be expressed in the larger community. Without a means for those values to honored we have where we came from and where amoral Wall Street wants to send us: the jungle. The survival of the strongest and most ruthless at the expense of everyone else.
Wall Street has become the looters and pillagers unrestrained by the rule of law. Laws certainly flow from culture but the rule of law is their political expression.
It’s more than interesting. It’s fascinating to me, an old history and political science major. We could be watching history unfold before our eyes, and those of us lucky enough to go and participate in it, or the coming October 6 movement in Washington, actually have a chance to participate.
Well, I think the irrelevance of politics is going to become clearer as the protest gets better defined. I listened in on the October 11 FDL webcast the other night, and the organizers have very clear and well-articulated goals. Right now, they’re making their demands generally, to Wall Street, Washington, Corporate America, etc., but, as the history of the Sixties shows, when those same demands and the pressure to meet them get in the face of specific corporations, specific institutions, in this cell phone web enabled world, those institutions are going to fold faster than you would believe. When we targeted specific companies in the Sixties, we did simple things like tieing up their phone lines, their customer service lines, their sales lines. You get the picture.
This isn’t a very good period for any institution with the possible exception of those devoted to “security”. If the protesters can’t develop mainstream support quickly they will be confronted with a much more dangerous security apparatus now than we faced in the 60′s. The technology also helps the police. They can more easily film you, file you, and track you than ever before and that has the risk of making you unemployable. What risk to my future did I face protesting in 1970? None.
Very true. But it was also true maybe even more so in the ex-Soviet Union and places like East Germany in the late 80′s and they were for real totalitarian regimes with gulags etc. Didn’t stop the people from bringing those regimes down did it? The question is how ready are the great majority of Americans for something similar here? A consensus is building out here that our so called leaders don’t give a shit about anybody but themselves and any REAL change is going to have to come from below. At the least things are getting much more volatile as people watch the economy nose dive and their kids going without work /careers/jobs for many yrs. When this kind of scenario starts to develop as it has all bets are off. Even seemingly tuned out and brain dead Americans might start to react. Maybe?
Like it or not, we have to get the police on our side. It’s not that hard to do. They’ve been screwed by Corporate America, too. In fact, they are us. They’re working class people.
And a lot of them know it.
I think you’re right, and your reference to the ex-Soviet Union is sharp — you might have mentioned Egypt, too. In Austin in the ’60s, the state troopers used to take our pics with polaroids and threaten to send them to our mothers. Pretty funny, But, seriously, I guess greenbell is just concerned about the glue that holds the little atoms stuck to the big molecules, job security, health insurance, fear of starvation and so on. Guess that’s why these movements don’t get started by company men and women. They get started by people who don’t have anything they’re afraid to lose.
Well, sure they get started by people who don’t have anything they are afraid to lose, but wishing for that state of affairs is a bit too bleak for me. It doesn’t alway end well either. It’s not always Berlin in the 80′s. Sometimes it’s Tiananmen Square.
Well, if the right keeps talking about cutting military pensions maybe we’ll have more than the police on our side.
Well, greenbell, we’ll let you sit this one out. But remember, man, if you win, you get to rewrite history. Hell, you can even blow things up and end up sipping Chardonnay with the President!
“The real question is: Can the emerging protest movements stay alive in the absence of something like the Counter Culture of the Sixties? Has enough work been done to build a culture of dissent to sustain them?”
I think the total death of the American Dream and the attacks of the Administration and Congress on the Poor, Working and what’s left of the Middle Class will sustain the protest movement.
I think it’s got to be as much class as culture that does it. This isn’t a culture war like the 60′s. It is very much a class war and if the protesters can make that case, then they’ve got a chance. Going after Wall Street isn’t bad but it has to be linked to other class issues – labor, the threats to seniors, the what I think is a very deliberate attempt to deny the middle class higher education….
If it’s a culture, I doubt we can win because the right knows how to play that game. It’s the class war we must win for democracy is pretty much impossible without a middle class.
Always with the negative waves, Moriarty.
I pray you are incorrect but probably are not. We’re screwed. Royally.
“The protestors have rejected politics. They are wide awake. They no longer believe a political solution to America’s problems is possible.”
I disagree. It looks to me like they are rejecting institutionalized and corporatized politics, and beginning to reclaim the raw, personal, community version of it. It’s the local food movement of politics.
Crap !
I think you have hit it there. One on one politics of the very raw form. The best kind.
Let’s see if they take it to the heart of the Empire.
Occupy the Fed / aka The Private Banking Cartel that runs things
Greenspan explains:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIQTu7kOT_8&feature=related
“There is no other agency of government which can overrule actions that we take….then what the relationships are don’t frankly matter.”
Sanders objects to this power of The Fed, “who got the money…Tell us who they are”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWXrMCGJT4
Bernanke: “No”
Thank you Woodrow Wilson for giving the country away to a bunch of greedy bankers.
Not only did the Soviet Union fall because the “security” forces didn’t react as monolithically murderously as the authorities might have hoped (and as pessimists might have feared), but it was born pretty much the same way, too. (Yes, there was the 8 months of the Kerensky government in between the Czar’s fall and Lenin’s taking power, but it was basically one sweep of change.) The soldiers decided not to shoot, and the people were in the Winter Palace, and the world was shaken (to paraphrase Jack Reed).
My grandmother was alive for both the beginning and the end of that story. (Okay, she was 1 and a half when the February Revolution happened, so she doesn’t remember much. But still.) I can only hope that I not only live to see Corporate Capitalism crumble as so many evil empires past have, but that I live to see a modern-day Eisenstein depict the heroism of the *people* who are too often assumed to just be unthinking “soldiers”, the way that the original Eisenstein did in The Battleship Potemkin.
Have to say I threw up a little in my mouth when I read this. It was not culture that led to the new deal–it was people on the streets making demands. There was no culture of being good to people. People in the streets created this long lost idea that government owes its citizens housing, living wage, and a sufficient amount of food to eat.
The Hippie Culture did not support the New Left. Their response to Viet Nam, oppression, etc. was to move to a commune and ‘create’ utopia. The success of the Civil Rights Movement led to the questioning of authority. CRA activists had to break laws to achieve their goals — who wouldn’t question authority after that.
Culture is an amorphous concept–real change comes in the streets–a political act.
That’s EXCESSES of the 1960s and 1970s, OhioGringo. Or at least that’s what Obama said when he was venerating the Gipper that time in Reno. (What a fucking sack of shit. What a fucking sack of shit. Sigh.)
’60s Hippie Lesson: Working within the system Doesn’t WORK! Don’t Be DUPED.
I think this one will stay loose and improvised until it hooks up with October 2011 or another relatively focused protest. But none of these protests will get off the ground as political protests. They’ll get some traction if they begin tying up banks and other businesses the way the sit ins tied up restaurants and movies in the Sixties. Remember Madison? It was protesting on campus recruiting by Dow Chemical launched the anti-war movement. When they begin to take it to individual banks and other corporations, those corporations will listen to their demands. Or maybe none of that will ever happen, and they’ll talk about how they almost had a movement instead.
You seem to have missed the point of the Labor Movement as well as the point of the Counter Culture. Remarkable achievement. Do you attribute your lack of historical perspective to your politics or to your culture?
Greenbell, I think you are absolutely correct in defining the current impasse and struggle as a class struggle, not a ’60′s-ish cultural revolution.
The ’60′s was indeed cultural. No such popular cultural contest exists today.
This struggle is class-based, and as long as most Americans have room on their credit cards, it’s going to be difficult to organize.
Those who see current events as a cultural struggle have too small a vision, and consequently mistake current discontent as equivalent to the extraordinary inequities of the pre-1964 civil rights era. Those of us who see it as a class struggle are in the early days, and persistence is the only option.
“Can the emerging protest movements stay alive in the absence of something like the Counter Culture of the Sixties?”
Short answer: YES. In the 60s millions of US citizens weren’t wholesale being thrown out of their homes, crappy jobs and disenfranchised from the human race.
This time it’s hitting RIGHT at home. This is beyond party, beyond politics, beyond all the bullshit issues the RICH have used as a smokescreen to divide and control us to keep us from seeing
It’s not political
It’s not gender based
It’s not race based
It’s not sexual preference-based
It’s about the HAVES versus the HAVE NOTS
and it’s never really been about ANYTHING ELSE.
“Baptiste” was half-right. It’s all politics, or rather it’s all political economy, in the sense that everything rides on a political economy.
The 1960s brought us “all you need is love” as a message sung to us by millionaires, i.e. the Beatles, whose fame was accompanied by the entrepreneurial spirit of Brian Epstein. Today, the ’60s cultural revolution having joined with consumerism and achieved victory, the next step approaches: democratic collectivism as opposed to corporate individualism.
nail. head.
Everyone tries to understand the occupy wall street protest with their objective rational mind. They take a glance and see that no specific leaders or any specific policy suggestions are offered, and they dismiss it immediately. What many of the “really, very serious” minded folk don’t understand is the feeling. The feeling of being screwed by the rich and having no justice or any way to fix the problem with traditional means. It’s an idea not so easily squashed. Even if you make fun of them as silly hippies, which is actually a really effective way to dismiss something. Some people, alot of people, just really hate hippies or anything resembling them (think Cartman from South Park).
As far as Mr. Blow’s article “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” – Upton Sinclair
Stop calling me Barbara!
The “Culture of Dissent,” has its origins with America’s founders who had a similar problem as Americans today, and no problem telling the corporate interests in England to simply “fuck themselves.” These interests like the East India Tea Corp, had the King’s Army to do the bidding of corporations, via war! This was America’s revolution from the corrupt corporate cohorts engaged in colonial crime fucking the seeds of a great nation many a time.
Jefferson is on point. The rape of a nation by corporate aristocrats using the color of law. Not much different from slave-owners protecting slavery!!!!!!!!!!!
MBA – Mostly Bloody Awful
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2009/2526727.htm
Billy, by accepting the definition of politics as that which is contained by the two-party system you have already conceded the field to the enemy. You also exxagerate the role of the hippies and counterculture in the successes of the New Left. The research suggests otherwise. Some people were spending most their time organizing (against the war, for civil rights, for free speech on campuses etc.) and other people were spending most of their time smoking shitty brown weed and getting laid. Of course their was overlap, but far less than the cartoon version of history we are fed by the television and film industry.
OWS is fantastic. But, this leaderless we are only horizontal affinity groups won’t last, or the movement won’t last. complex and varigated organization requires well organization, as unsexy and uncool as it is. By all means, lets make our orgs as democratic as possible, but process for the sake of process is narcissistic navel gazing of the trustifarian set. Let’s hope the OWS people pull the unions to the left and the unions bring some of their organizaitonal knowledge to the OWS movement.
la lucha continua
I knew a guy was in a car wreck, lost all ability to communicate, except by quoting lines from movies. He did just fine.
Of course, economic historians like K. Polanyi would argue that the political economy, like everything else, is embedded in a society’s culture. The commoditization of people (labor), the environment and money are the achievements of Capitalism — an economic system that’s only been around 150 years or so. Barely a moment in the history of the human race.
Put me down in the sex, drugs and rock and roll camp. But when I say culture trumps politics, I mean all politics, not just the two-party system we “enjoy” today. Of course, if you’re a political junky, everything looks like the possibility of a fix. This movement will transcend politics or it won’t make it. Time will tell.
Spot on comment.
Say it again. What a fucking sack of shit.
The real danger in this regard will come from the mercenary armies, Blackwater types, etc., who are not Americans mostly, and the Christian Dominionists in our armed forces who are not about the people at all. And we all need to be aware of the weaponry now available that can lay down whole crowds at once.
Start protesting outside the NYTimes corporate offices. It’s nothing more than an organ of propaganda and indoctrination in the service of the oligarchs and the ruling elites. OCCUPY THE NYTIMES!
Now you’re cooking with gas!
The counter culture movement of the 60′s terrified the establishment so much that they had to mount a fascist revolution, starting with Reagan, to destroy the left. That revolution is still in progress, having successfully marginalized or terrorized the left into silence. Universities are now so commercialized, academics are corporate tools, not all, of course. Young people have been propagandized from birth to be good little consumers, neoliberal tools in favor of globalization, despising working class people as trolls, so they can help the fascist agenda. But now, economic crisis is changing all that. It’s economic crises that cause revolutions, not philosophy, although, don’t get me wrong, I think philosophy is important, take Naom Chomsky for instance. They provide an intellectual framework and justification for dissent. But let us not forget it was the fishwives who raided Versailles. Out of hunger and desperation. The current cultural climate is rage and that will drive change, not immediately but change will come to pass as the current system collapses thanks to it’s own inherent flaws, per Marx.
I’m thrilled too. The revolution of the 60′s began slowly too. It had no one focus. It may have begun in Sproul Plaza at the University of Berkeley, where student became enraged when police were called in to beat up and arrest peaceful demonstrators, demonstrating for free speech. The police brutality brought more people to the Plaza. Pretty soon, there were many people at the plaza shutting down the university. The movement grew into a huge anti-war protest, although at first it was just young people who were reviled as communists, later mainstream people joined in and stopped the war. Then civil rights were added to the agenda.
But at first the agenda was just people getting mad at a specific situation. I wish more people would get mad about the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and the war machine. The Patriot Act is the single most dangerous threat to freedom and justice. Our war industry is bankrupting us. We are living in a police state. The government can do anything it wants to us, it’s only public opinion holding it in check for now. That could change as protests grow. And they will.
Oh there was plenty of risk in 1970, many people were blacklisted and terrorized by the FBI. But you are right the risk is greater now thanks to the Patriot Act which allows our government to do anything to us, up to and including assassination. ‘Terrorist’ is a convenient catch all that can be used to justify harming anyone. Homeland Security is our gestapo, not designed to protect us but to control us in the event things get ugly and they are getting very ugly. Facebook, online banking, all of the technology lures out there are excellent mechanisms for the police state to track you down and ruin you or worse. Don’t think it can’t happen here. It can and I’m afraid it will as protests develop into a full blown problem for the status quo.
The 60′s revolution was a class struggle. It was a struggle against the same forces that have created our current police state and corporate run government. Revolt does not come from popular culture, but from desperation and poverty, driven by economic conditions. The Vietnam War was bankrupting the country, jobs were scarce, we were in yet another recession, so college grads and soldiers returning from Vietnam couldn’t find jobs. The cultural movement that fueled this revolt was about young people fed up with a militaristic, corporate society who were looking for ways to evade the draft and find a way to survive without becoming a cog in the corporate wheel. The sad thing is, when prosperity returned, the movement died, we did get sucked into the corporate wheel. Many of us anyway. But before that happened many changes were made to help people, civil rights, social benefits, war stopped temporarily and and the green movement. It opened our society up to the rest of the world for the first time, so there was also an intellectual renaissance. In this instance I don’t think prosperity will return to abort the movement. So things may get very interesting indeed.
Excellent. The MBA is the most bullshit degree possible and the MBA movement to have the leaders of companies be MBA’s instead of people who came up through the ranks and learned hands on what the business was all about is what has led to the collapse of our economy. Having worked in the corporate Fortune 500 world all my life I can tell you that there was a marked change when the domination of MBA’s came into being. Suddenly stupid decisions caused previously successful companies to go bankrupt, because you can’t make good decisions based on theory and models. This happened so extensively I think we are now in a situation where American corporations can’t compete because they are run by morons. And also by bullshit generated by said morons, lying to their bosses to get ahead, creating statistics and ‘facts’ that are total lies, hiding the real situation so it can’t be fixed, as if they had one clue how to fix them. Our decline is like a cancer, we can’t be honest about anything, can’t fix anything, and from corporations to government to education to health care to housing, we are failing to survive because we exist in a culture fueled by bullshit and pretense.
Great post and comment thread generally, but for me your comment gets to the heart of the matter. Would like to hear more specifically about what you think the dominant feelings are, and where they come from. But that’s just me, over-anal-izing again.
Basically it doesn’t have to make sense to Democrats, progressives, etc. Probably better that it doesn’t. We’ve had our shot and where has it gotten us?
As always, see also Ian Welsh. Short version:
“None of the above is to disrespect the Occupy movement. I’m a big believer that they’re doing something important and that they deserve props for putting themselves on the line. Their embrace of apparently leaderless leadership is a master stroke of organizing, and indicates they understand that any visible leadership will be destroyed, smeared or co-opted. This is all good, but it is useful for those of us on the intellectual margins to disengage our emotions, keep our hopes in check, and look at the state of play dispassionately.
This is a step on the road. It is necessary, but it is not the whole of the journey. This is also where we are, and anyone who wants to contribute to a better future should be supporting the Occupy movement.”
Silent Corporations, unless the spewed propaganda and lies benefit bottom lines. Corporations lie, cheat and deceive all in the name of myopic “corpo” self interest.
It’s as you say barely a moment in the history of the human race — but Kees van der Pijl charts the rise of capitalism back to the first capitalist state: England after the Glorious Revolution, 1688. Generally speaking, the ground was cleared for capitalism by enclosure laws in 16th century England and, more generally, by the flood of precious metals into Europe after the Spanish conquest of the Americas. The period of capitalism’s assembly was a unique period of world history.
Sure, political economy is embedded in culture. But the forces of production do not take some arbitrary form based on cultural whim — they’re conditioned by the shape of technology in any period of history as well as by the relative state of development of the world-system.
Today capitalism appears to be in old age, yet the concept of an alternate system of political economy appears to be rather poorly developed. This is why movement work is necessary regardless of the disorganized state of “demands” placed upon the system — our task is to create another unique period of world history, and not merely to demand X, Y, and Z.
I agree. I might want to think a little more about the way culture channels technology, though. Hard to imagine the Hopi building the pyramids.