Latest news with #PrivacyNotice
Eater
an hour ago
- Entertainment
- Eater
Heads Up: Keith Lee's Portland Restaurant Tour Has Begun
is the associate editor for the Northern California and Pacific Northwest region writing about restaurant and bar trends, coffee and cafes, and pop-ups. Former MMA fighter and TikTok food critic Keith Lee has entered Portland's restaurant scene stage left. The online reviewer, who mainly focuses on mom-and-pop operations and typically eats in his car, has been called a 'voice of a generation.' His sway over his 17.2 million followers is such that a positive review of a restaurant can lead to a swelling in sales, while a negative one can cause serious problems. Last year when his fans claimed there might have been a worm in a piece of sushi Lee ate in Seattle, the controversy was so intense the restaurant temporarily closed. So Portland restaurant owners are surely waiting with baited breath to see where he'll appear. His first stop: Gado Gado. The Indonesian-inspired restaurant isn't quite a hole-in-the-wall affair — it's been nominated fof James Beard Awards and was a semifinalist this year. Chef Thomas Pisha-Duffly and Mariah Pisha-Duffly's restaurant boasts an $89 prix fixe menu and its lauded dishes like roti canai, rendang, and curries spun into second restaurant Oma's Hideaway. Gado Gado's handiwork is considered some of Portland's premiere eating. Gado Gado Lee visited on Wednesday, July 30 and ordered a slew of dishes including blistered tomato curry, chicken satay, English peas on rice, and a side of roti. Across the board, he was a big fan. 'That curry has so much flavor in it,' Lee said of the order. 'That is ridiculous.' Lee begins his video admitting that while he's heard the place is good, the restaurant was slow when he arrived: So after the meal, he bought $2,000 in gift cards for the customers after him to use and left a $500 tip. 'SCREAMING, CRYING, THROWING UP!!!!!!! ,' begins Gado Gado's Instagram post recap of the event. 'Holy shit I am overwhelmed with gratitude.' Lee dines anonymously, or he attempts to by sending his kids in to get his orders. His priority is often Black-owned businesses, and what's been called the 'Keith Lee Effect' cannot be overstated: myriad testimonials from restaurant owners show just how powerful a visit from Lee can be. In late 2024, the then Las Vegas resident moved his family to Texas, but he travels the country often. Where else should Lee go in Portland now that he's started with such a powerhouse? Let Eater know through our tipline. Eater Portland All your essential food and restaurant intel delivered to you Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Eater
3 hours ago
- Business
- Eater
Julianna's Closes in Inman Park Suddenly, Plus More Closings to Know
Henna Bakshi is the Regional Editor, South at Eater and an award-winning food and wine journalist with a WSET (Wine and Spirits Education Trust) Level 3 degree. She oversees coverage in Atlanta, Miami, New Orleans, the Carolinas, and Nashville. The exterior of Julianna's Coffee & Crepes was housed in a building more than 100 years old. Julianna's Coffee & Crepes Here are the latest closings of note in Atlanta. Julianna's Coffee & Crepes closes suddenly After more than 11 years, Julianna's Coffee & Crepes, a hidden gem in Inman Park on Lake Avenue, has closed. A sign on the door reads it's 'due to nonpayment of rent.' Google has listed the restaurant as permanently closed, and phone calls are going to voicemail. The petite restaurant, by chef Andrew Turoczi, was tucked inside a circa-1901 house and served Hungarian-style savory and sweet crepes made from an old family recipe. Julianna's opened in 2013. Eater has reached out to the restaurant for comment. Inman Park bakery, Julianna's, has closed. Eater reader Lazy Dog closes in Peachtree Corners Town Center Lazy Dog in Peachtree Corners (5224 Peachtree Parkway) closed last week, citing that guests had parking and navigation difficulties, according to WSB-TV. The Alpharetta and Dunwoody locations remain open, and the 8,300 square foot Peachtree Corners spot is currently listed for sale. The California-based chain restaurant was open for six years. Neighboring Uncle Jack's Meat House is also listed for sale, marking a difficult time for the Peachtree Corners Town Center restaurants. Lazy Dog at Peachtree Corners Town Center closes after six years. Lazy Dog Restaurants Longtime Midtown seafood restaurant Lure closes next month Lure Saltwater Kitchen and Bar is closing in Midtown after its final service on August 30. It will serve some of its classic seafood dishes for the next month to honor its 14 years on Crescent Avenue. The establishment is owned by Fifth Group Restaurants, which also owns Ela, La Tavola, South City Kitchen, Ecco, and Alma Cocina. Read the full report here. Souper Jenny closing Brookhaven location, relocating Souper Jenny is closing its Brookhaven location this week as it prepares to relocate to Chamblee. 'As they say as one door closes another door opens!' reads the cafe's post on Instagram. 'We are excited for our new home, with lots of free parking, and a bigger dining room to bring your friends and family.' Eater Atlanta All your essential food and restaurant intel delivered to you Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Car and Driver
a day ago
- General
- Car and Driver
View Exterior Photos of the 2026 Cadillac Lyriq-V
We use technologies that provide information about your interactions with this site to others for functionality, analytics, targeted advertising, and other uses. Learn more in our Privacy Notice.
Vox
a day ago
- Politics
- Vox
What a Black fascist can teach us about liberalism
is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers ideology and challenges to democracy, both at home and abroad. His book on democracy,, was published 0n July 16. You can purchase it here. American diplomat, consultant and author Lawrence Dennis (1893-1977) walks to court during his sedition trial on May 9, 1944 in Washington, DC. Getty Images It was 1935, and Lawrence Dennis was sure that fascism was coming to America. He couldn't wait. Dennis, a diplomat turned public intellectual, had just published an article in a leading political science journal titled 'Fascism for America.' In his mind, the Great Depression was proof that liberalism had run its course — its emphasis on free markets and individual liberty unable to cope with the complexities of a modern economy. With liberal democracy doomed, the only question was whether communism or fascism would win the future. And Dennis was rooting for the latter. 'I should like to see our two major political parties accept the major fascist premises,' he wrote. 'Whether our coming fascism is more or less humane and decent will depend largely on the contributions our humane elite can make to it in time.' His case for fascism, made at book length in 1936's The Coming American Fascism, felt persuasive to many at the time. A contemporary review of the book in the Atlantic wrote that 'its arraignment of liberal leadership is unanswerable'; he was well-regarded enough to advise leading isolationist Charles Lindbergh and meet with elites on both sides of the Atlantic, ranging from sitting senators to Adolf Hitler himself. On the Right The ideas and trends driving the conservative movement, from senior correspondent Zack Beauchamp. Email (required) Sign Up By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. I first encountered Dennis researching my feature on liberalism and its critics (which has just emerged from the Highlight's paywall). In the piece, I use him to show that liberalism's enemies have long predicted its inevitable doom. But the more I've thought about Dennis, the more I've realized how much we have to learn from him today. There are striking parallels between Dennis's fascist attack on liberalism and the arguments made by its current right-wing critics. And given that Dennis's arguments proved so badly wrong, his fate should be a warning against accepting similar predictions of inevitable liberal doom from his modern heirs. There are, I think, two central errors in Dennis's work that have direct parallels in the arguments made by contemporary illiberal radicals. I've termed them 'anti-liberal traps,' and I think many are falling into them today. What Lawrence Dennis believed Dennis came to fascism through a peculiar route. A Black man who passed for white for nearly his entire life, he was openly critical of Jim Crow and American racism — almost, his biographer Gerald Horne theorizes, as if he wanted people to know who he truly was. Horne further suggests that Dennis's embrace of fascism was motivated in part by disgust with the racism of the median American voter. Dennis, Horne intimates, may have been so disgusted with racist rule of 'the people' that he embraced rule-by-elite as an alternative. But while he did discuss race, Dennis's arguments in The Coming American Fascism were primarily economic. In his view, the Great Depression was not an isolated crisis but rather a sign of the current political order's structural failures. Dennis believed that capitalism depended on several key factors to deliver economic growth — including continued acquisition of new territory, a growing population, and debt-financed business expansion. By the 1930s, he believed that these factors had reached a dead end: that the US could not feasibly acquire new territory, that its population would level off thanks to immigration restrictionism and birth control, and that private debt had reached wholly unsustainable levels. The Depression, he argued, was a symptom of these structural failings coming to a head. In Dennis's view, American liberal democracy did not have the tools to repair the flaws in the capitalist system. Liberalism was, he believed, joined inevitably to laissez-faire economics. Its deference to private property was so total, its institutions so dominated by the interests of the wealthy, that it would be impossible for even a leader as ambitious as then-President Franklin D. Roosevelt to make serious internal adjustments. 'The features of the liberal system we are now discussing are fundamental. It is constantly forgotten that the quintessence of liberalism and liberal liberties under a constitution is the maintenance of a regime of special or exceptionally favorable considerations for private property,' Dennis writes. 'A series of majority votes arrived at by the parliamentary or Congressional methods of majority group pressures, lobbying, and the individual pursuit of reelection by hundreds of office holders, do not constitute a guiding hand. And a political system of checks and balances is not coordinated control.' This last line hints at Dennis's fascist vision: a system in which liberal democracy is replaced by the rule of a handful of enlightened elites, who develop a comprehensive plan for the economy rather than leaving things up to the whims of private owners. Only state control over economic affairs, including nationalization of the banking system, could repair the malfunctioning economy and put the United States on the pathway to prosperity. Dennis was no communist: he did not believe in the complete abolition of private property. Rather, he believed that the state should be far more aggressive in dictating to private owners — forcing them to make corporate decisions based not on the profit motive but rather on the good of the collective, as defined by the fascist governing class. This was the model emerging in Italy and Germany at the time he was writing, and one he believed would prove vastly more efficient and productive in the modern world than American-style liberal democratic capitalism. 'America cannot forever remain 17th and 18th century in its law, and political and social theory and practice, while moving in the vanguard of 20th century technological progress. The defenders of 18th century Americanism are doomed to become the laughing stock of their own countrymen,' he writes. Dennis believed that liberalism's practical failings stemmed from its philosophical essence: that 'the features of the liberal system we are now discussing are fundamental.' The liberal obsession with individual rights, be it private property or free speech, made liberal democracies ideologically incapable of taking the economic steps necessary to fix capitalism's errors. 'The fascist State entirely repudiates the liberal idea of conflict of interests and rights as between the State and the individual,' he writes. 'Liberalism assumes that individual welfare and protection is largely a matter of having active and powerful judicial restraints on governmental interference with the individual; Fascism assumes that individual welfare and protection is mainly secured by the strength, efficiency, and success of the State in the realization of the national plan.' The obvious objection is that this fascist vision would lead to terrifying mistreatment of citizens. Dennis did allow that Germany had gone too far in this direction by repressing the media and the church, but argued that 'a desirable form of fascism for Americans' could avoid such 'drastic measures.' Even Germany, Dennis believed, would not become 'a State and government…whose every act would be an abuse,' as 'such an eventuality seems most improbable in any modern State.' Though fascist ideology might define the national plan in a way that directed violence against ethnic minorities, Dennis — ever the closeted Black man — believed that such racism could be excised from the fascist project. 'If, in this discussion, it be assumed that one of our values should be a type of racism which excludes certain races from citizenship, then the plan of execution should provide for the annihilation, deportation, or sterilization of the excluded races,' he worried. 'If, on the contrary, as I devoutly hope will be the case, the scheme of values will include that of a national citizenship in which race will be no qualifying or disqualifying condition, then the plan of realization must, in so far as race relations are concerned, provide for assimilation or accommodation of race differences within the scheme of smoothly running society.' The anti-liberal traps, from 1936 to 2025 We now know that every single one of Dennis's arguments was terribly wrong. The New Deal worked; both the US and European democracy developed social models that reformed capitalism without abandoning its essence. This political-economic system proved far more effective economically than either fascist or communist central planning. And fascism in practice committed every horrible abuse that its liberal critics warned of — and some so awful that almost no one imagined their possibility in advance. Now, '1930s-era fascist was wrong' is not exactly breaking news. But what I found notable about Dennis is how closely his argument follows a general pattern of anti-liberal argument — one which many far-right intellectuals deploy today in their critiques. It is one centered on what I described earlier as the twin 'anti-liberal traps.' The first anti-liberal trap is a claim that a recent crisis is a product of unchangeable and unreformable liberal philosophical commitments. It is a belief that while liberal states still stand, the author has seen their coming doom — and its causes align, just perfectly, with the author's preferred view of the world. Such claims not only demand extraordinary evidence, but risk being embarrassed when events in the world begin to shift. Patrick Deneen, a political theorist at Notre Dame, has put this mode of argument at the center of his worldview. In two recent books, Why Liberalism Failed and Regime Change, Deneen argues that the current rise of populist figures like Donald Trump augurs liberalism's collapse — a collapse that is, he believes, a necessary product of liberalism's philosophical commitments to meritocracy and individualism. 'Liberalism has careened towards its inevitable failure,' he writes in Regime Change, because 'liberalism's conception of liberty created both a new ruling class and degraded the lives of the masses.' Specifically, he argues, liberalism's commitment to freeing individuals to live the lives of their choosing has led to weakening of the ties that bind humans together — without which most will suffer so badly that the system cannot long survive. 'The advance of liberal liberty has meant the gradual, and then accelerating, weakening, redefinition, or overthrowing of many formative institutions and practices of human life, whether family, the community, a vast array of associations, schools and universities, architecture, the arts, and even the churches,' he writes. Deneen's analysis is, in argumentative structure, extraordinarily similar to Dennis's. Both take recent events, be it the rise of Trump or the Depression, as proof that liberalism's doom is not merely likely but assured. Both argue that this inevitable collapse stems from liberalism's unchangeable and unreformable philosophical essence. And both, notably, locate the failures in areas that align with their political interests. Deneen is a Catholic conservative who believes the state ought to promote conservative religious values; Dennis was a fascist who believed in a state-structured economy. Not coincidentally, they blame liberalism's inevitable doom on (respectively) its social and economic failings. In describing these similarities, I am not attempting a comprehensive rebuttal of Deneen's arguments. The content of their arguments are different enough, as are the circumstances. Perhaps Dennis was wrong and Deneen is right. But there is a tendency, among observers of all stripes, to overextrapolate from recent developments — typically in ways that flatter their own worldviews and biases. The second anti-liberal trap represents a similar kind of wishful thinking. It is an idealization of liberalism's alternatives: a comparison of actually-existing liberalism either to theoretical models or whitewashed versions of its real-life competitors. To imagine, in essence, Dennis's anti-racist fascism or less-hateful Nazism. You can see this, most obviously, in the recent right-wing vogue for Catholic integralism: a political model in which the state would be tasked with using its power to further the spiritual mission of the church. Any such project would require truly extraordinary amounts of coercion to be implemented in a country that's 20 percent Catholic (and most American Catholics are not themselves far-right). More broadly, right-wing religious regimes have a poor track record when it comes to protecting the rights of non-believers. Yet integralists respond to these claims either by deflection — liberal states coerce too! — or an assertion that their confessional state would surely be better than the others. Recalling a conversation with a Jewish colleague about what would happen to this person under integralism, Harvard's Adrian Vermeule — a leading American integralist — described his answer in two glib words: 'nothing bad.' You also see parallels to Dennis in the way that modern anti-liberals talk about contemporary Hungary, which has become to the illiberal right what the Nordic states are to the American left. Hungary is undeniably authoritarian, but its modern right-wing defenders angrily deny that its regime is anything other than a well-functioning democracy. Hard evidence to the contrary, such as its repression of independent media or attacks on judicial independence, are dismissed as liberal propaganda or else no worse than what happens here in the United States. This false equivalence, incidentally, was a favorite move of Dennis's. In dismissing charges that fascism would trample on individual rights the liberal state protects, he replied that all states coerce, just in different ways. 'The popular type of denunciation of fascism on the ground that it stands for State absolutism, or a State of unlimited powers, as contrasted with the liberal State of limited powers, is based on misrepresentation of the true nature of the liberal State,' he wrote. 'The important differences between fascism and liberalism in this respect lie between those certain things which each State, respectively, does without limitation.' Again, the point is not to suggest complete equivalence: Viktor Orbán's Hungary is not Adolf Hitler's Germany. Rather, it is to point out how similar the arguments are structurally — how easy it is, when starting from a point of hostility to liberalism, to handwave away criticisms of its alternatives through idealizations and tu quoques. Lawrence Dennis was not a dumb man. After reading much of his writing, I'm confident of that. But his arguments, which seemed so persuasive to many at the time, proved to be mistaken in nearly every particular — a shortsighted extrapolation from recent evidence that misread both the politics of liberal democracies and liberalism's philosophical adaptability to new circumstances. It's a lesson that radical anti-liberals today ought to take to heart.
Daily Record
2 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Record
UKIP leader blasted for filming unresponsive man on Glasgow street
Nick Tenconi shared a clip of the man - who was on the ground and appeared to be unresponsive - near to St Enoch Square in Glasgow city centre. UKIP's leader has been blasted on social media after posting footage of a vulnerable man he found passed out on a Glasgow street. Nick Tenconi shared a clip of the man - who was on the ground and appeared to be unresponsive - near to St Enoch Square in the city centre on Sunday (July 27). As Glasgow Live reports, the UKIP leader was in the city for a "mass deportation" rally, which was met by counter-protesters. Tenconi claims in the post that he stopped after spotting the man 'lying unconscious in the street', and he continued to film the man while he waited for an ambulance to arrive. In the video, he says: "I just don't understand people just walking by. I've been trying to assist this man for 10 minutes - on the phone to 999. I don't get it. People just walking by, they don't care. "It's unacceptable. You've got to help people, guys." The clip, which has been viewed over half a million times, was slammed by supporters and critics alike, with some branding the move a 'new low'. One person wrote: "Wow filming him for clicks and engagement. You earned top stars in the virtue signalling league today mate. All praise your virtue and compassion." Another added: "New low - filming an unconscious guy for engagement." A third said: "You really have to question both the ethics and political instincts of somebody who would film and upload this. What the hell are you doing?" A fourth wrote: "I actually did the same thing a couple of weeks ago - didn't film it (with my 2nd phone,) didn't publish my do goodery on the internet. Just spent a few minutes of my time to help. That's all. If hope if I was in that position, someone would help me, not post my predicament on X." Tenconi hit back at people who accused him of "taking advantage of a vulnerable person," in a statement defending his actions. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. He said he checked if the man was breathing before following the instructions given by 999 operators who advised against placing him in the recovery position and asked someone to 'get a defibrillator' while he stayed with him. The UKIP leader added: "People like me don't care about being liked", and says he decided to film to highlight that no one else stopped to help the man. Tenconi added: "Maybe those who disapprove of the video should question why I made it rather than be so quick to judge and slander. "As for my justifications for filming., I've explained this very clearly in the caption of the video on X. I am disgusted that many people walked past and didn't stop to help. The video highlights how desensitised and accepting many people in Glasgow are of violence, crime, and not loving thy neighbour. "I knew how many people would see that video and when the paramedic was asking me to wait with the man, I took 20 seconds to highlight this. "I do not regret showing the man's face, I hope that someone who knows the man sees the video and does something to help him. Maybe this is the wake up call — his friends and family need to do the right thing."
