A Forum for Vigorous Debate, Cornerstone of Democracy

[For the journal--guidelines, focus, etc.--go to www.theamericandissident.org. If you have questions, please contact me at todslone@hotmail.com. Comments are NOT moderated (i.e., CENSORED)!]
Encouraged censorship and self-censorship seem to have become popular in America today. Those who censor others, not just self, tend to favor the term "moderate," as opposed to "censor" and "moderation" to "censorship." But that doesn't change what they do. They still act as Little Caesars or Big Brother protectors of the thin-skinned. Democracy, however, demands a tough populace, not so easily offended. On this blog, and to buck the trend of censorship, banning, and ostracizing, comments are NEVER "moderated." Rarely (almost NEVER) do the targets of these blog entries respond in an effort to defend themselves with cogent counter-argumentation. This blog is testimony to how little academics, poets, critics, newspaper editors, cartoonists, political hacks, cultural council apparatchiks, librarians et al appreciate VIGOROUS DEBATE, cornerstone of democracy. Clearly, far too many of them could likely prosper just fine in places like communist China and Cuba or Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Russia, not to mention Sweden, England, and Austria.

More P. Maudit cartoons (and essays) at Global Free Press: http://www.globalfreepress.org

Friday, October 8, 2021

Dan McCullough and Cape Cod Times

Privileged columnists like McCullough don't give a shite that most citizens do NOT have voice in the press.  Why is one community college instructor given voice week after week after week, while others are not?  

Thursday, September 30, 2021

Submissions wanted for next issue!

The American Dissident is currently seeking new submissions for issue #42, which will likely be published in late November.  Please read the guidelines on www.theamericandissident.org prior to submitting.  Thank you!  

Below are the front cover and editorial for the previous issue #41.


Insane Nation

Amanda Gor’mania, Cancel Culture,

Identity Politics, How Dare You &

Free Speech in Its Final Death Throes

…that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

—Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address 


Democracy is dying… and always has been.  Government of the corrupt elite, by the corrupt elite, for the corrupt elite is America’s reality.  We, the Proles, must conform and shut our mouths or be punished!  (Now, for Trish Somers, I must state that’s what happened to me at Sturgis Library! See Literary Letters section.  LOL!)  Anyhow, welcome to the insane nation… promoted by the MSM!

    The front cover of this issue depicts the inaugural poetess Amanda Gorman.  The flurry of 100% laudatory, established-order reviews with Gorman’s regard provoked me to sketch the poetess/goddess… in the same pose depicted on Time magazine’s front cover (see below).  The laudation came from the likes of Toi Derricotte, co-founder of Cave Canem (White poets need NOT apply!), who stated:  “She seems to have awakened the spirit of poetry the way I think it was intended to be, to be a voice of the people.”  Voice of the people or rather voice of the oligarchs and their hack politicians?!  Racist! Racist! Racist!  

     Standing behind and to the right of the Ornamental Lit Cog, I depicted Michelle Obama, who interviewed Gorman for Time magazine; Sharon Marcus, English and comparative literature professor at Columbia University, who declared, “we’re overdue for a poetic mega-idol”; and Jennifer Benka, Executive Director of the Academy of American Poets, who stated, “She mapped, in language, a way forward, giving us healing directions that we can repeat to ourselves.  It’s just been too painful.”  Oh, my.  Other “laudatorians” could have also been depicted. On the other side of the Ornament, career multimillionaire public-servant Biden is seated in his new throne.  My concern was that Biden’s groping might take the attention off of Gorman.  But it would have been too difficult to reposition the left arm, which had already been inked in.  Ainsi soit-il.  The reasoning for the front-cover depiction is laid out in “Press Panegyrics for a Poet” on page 14.  BTW, if Trump had had an inaugural poet, I certainly would have sledgehammered him or her on a front cover.   

s for the back cover, Santa Clara University’s highly subjective “degrading language” policy, as well as its poor free-speech track record, incited the  Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) to accord the university the Speech Code of the Month for November, 2020.  Do the student editors of Santa Clara Review give a damn about that?  No.  Do their academic advisors give a damn?  No.  According to the review’s website, “Throughout its duration, the publication has represented Santa Clara University's commitment to the humanities—a tenet of Jesuit education.”  Well, I suspect the “humanities” has come to mean identity politics, cultural-race theory, censorship, equity not equality, and rejection of liberal values, including freedom of speech and vigorous debate. SCR’s response to the back cover is in the Literary Letters section. 

     On another note, and in a vain effort to clarify for the confused, the term dissident does NOT mean socialist or communist.  In reality, it stems from those who fought against autocratic socialist and communist regimes, including the former USSR, China, and Cuba. It implies fighting for freedom of speech and expression.  In America today, freedom to speak ones mind often results in cancellation of ones voice because socialist and communist mindsets have been gaining power at an alarming rate and today control much of the cultural, media, and academic realms, not to mention the political.  Dissident means fighting for reason, facts, and logic against the reigning ideology.  Dissidence is not ideological-partisan adherence.

    Cancel culture really means cancellation of facts, reason, and logic.  Disinformation really means any information, no matter how true and factual, that counters the ideology in power (e.g., the deep state and Neo-Marxism).  It is the new term of predilection.  Why the need for a new term in the already mega-arsenal of shoot-the-messenger terms? Perhaps to simply rejuvenate the shooting? Both concepts seek to terminate freedom of expression and to be mostly espoused today by left-wing, woke partisans.       

   “Dark and vile verbiage” is an interesting phrase, due to its highly subjective nature.  The term serves to eliminate freedom of expression.  An aberrant case at the University of Illinois at Chicago brought it to the public attention.  FIRE noted:  On an exam issued by law professor Jason Kilborn, who even self-censored: “a ‘n____’ and ‘b____’ (profane expressions for African Americans and women).”  It was a hypothetical in which a woman accused her former employer of calling her nigger and bitch.  And yes, I will write the full words until I am dead.  Call me a Nazi-white-nationalist-racist-misogynist-xenophobe-transphobe or whatever other “dark and vile verbiage.”  I don’t give a damn.  Still, I will not call a black person, a nigger.  If I were to do that, it would imply a certain childishness and lack of cogent argumentation.  Far too much ad hominem is being thrown around today by grown, purportedly educated adults, black and white.  In any case, a group of spineless Black Law Students Association members had put together a petition, accusing the professor of using “dark and vile verbiage,” which led to his suspension.  One black student had declared she had had “heart palpitations.”  Wow.  Later, however, the professor was reinstated.  Reason trumped… or almost… or sort of… 

he forces of conformity have become very strong today in America, especially as censorship (moderation) has spread as an intellectual plague.  Conform or be cancelled.  Think as the group or you will not exist.  Sadly, most poets, professors, journalists, and editors easily give in, promote, and espouse those forces to the extent that the force of truth has become very weak.  Rather not be cancelled than dare stand up and speak the truth seems to have become the general modus operandi.  Rather write the dictated “n-word,” for example, than the word it stands for, “nigger.”  For the bulk of conforming professionals and leaders, thou shalt never cross the line of dictated propriety.  And that is why I hold little respect for titles like Dr. (PhD), Laureate, Honorary, Judge, Senator, Director, and on and on.  Oops!  I forgot to include editor.

   Finally, when I accepted his poem, “January 6, 2021” (see next page), though told him I didn’t agree with it, Dan Sklar wrote: “That's one of the things I have always respected about you, open to all viewpoints.”  And I thought, if everyone had the same viewpoints, then I’d have no grist at all for creating critical writing and critical cartoons.  Indeed, confronting different viewpoints provokes thought and creativity, at least for me. Equally, I must thank Dan for his openness.  Hell, he was the only professor ever to have invited me to his classes to speak to his students…  

Saturday, August 7, 2021

Mary Ellen Egan First Amendment Watch New York University


The following cartoon was sent to the targets in 2020.  No response was ever received.  Non-response is the typical academic response to outside criticism...

Wednesday, July 21, 2021

Cultural Center of Cape Cod


Cultural Center of Cape Cod... Where Hypocrisy Rules!

Robert M. NashNo response was ever received from the Cultural Center! 


From: George Slone <todslone@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 10:28 AM
To: bnash@cultural-center.org
Cc: ahowes@cultural-center.org; lwolk@cultural-center.org; info@cultural-center.org; apiliavsky@gmail.com
Subject: Query for a potential art exhibit
To the Cultural Center of Cape Cod:  
        Besides vaunting “inclusivity,” as in “all the arts for all of us,” why not do something truly inclusive by not excluding “some of the arts for some of us”?   Why not exhibit the “Entartete Kunst” series I’ve been working on for the past several years?  It features art unlikely to be included, for example, in the inclusivity mantra of local arts centers because of its critical component (fond) regarding local arts centers themselves, as well as other “muzzlers” of the arts, one might call gatekeeper guardians of forme.  
The watercolor below (see also attached) is included in my “Entartete Kunst” series and features the Cultural Center of Cape Cod (i.e., you, Lauren Wolk, and Angela Howes).  Now, why would you reject such art?   Indeed, by rejecting it, you increase its validity and veracity.  
Well, hopefully, at least, this little missive might actually compel you to think a moment—just a brief, brief moment—out of the local arts box.  

Thank you for your hopeful attention.

G. Tod Slone, PhD (universite de Nantes, FR) aka P. Maudit,
Founding Editor (1998)
The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence
217 Commerce Rd.

Barnstable, MA 02630



From: todslone@hotmail.com
To: ahowes@cultural-center.org
Subject: Query
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 18:33:51 -0400

Hi Angela Howes, Publisher, Bass River Press (Cultural Center of Cape Cod):  
Am I perhaps unofficially excluded from all things Cultural Center of Cape Cod for having criticized the Center last year with regards its inclusion statement et al?  If not, I'd love to send a manuscript on poetry pertinent to Martha's Vineyard Island or something more critical.  Please let me know what subjects are taboo, besides the usual.   Please do respond.  Thanks!  

G. Tod Slone, PhD (universite de Nantes, FR) aka P. Maudit,
Founding Editor (1998)
The American Dissident, a 501c3 Nonprofit Journal of Literature, Democracy, and Dissidence
217 Commerce Rd.
Barnstable, MA 02630

Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:03:30 +0000
> From: ahowes@cultural-center.org
> To: todslone@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: Query

Good afternoon,

The submission process is open to all residents of the Cape or 
Islands. Are you a full or part-time resident of the Cape? If so, you 
are eligible to submit to Bass River Press.

All manuscripts that follow the submission guidelines and contain the 
$20 submission fee will be considered. Bass River Press utilizes a 
blind reading process, so all manuscripts will be reviewed anonymously 
and judged on their merit alone.

There are no restrictions on subject or style, and the poetry does not 
necessarily have to be about the Cape or Islands.

Thank you for your email!


From: todslone@hotmail.com
To: ahowes@cultural-center.org
Subject: RE: Query
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:57:12 -0400

Hi Angela,
Thanks for your response.  Nothing personal here.  I do not know you.  BUT, as an artist and poet, I do overtly question and challenge.  I'd rather stand for truth, than get published.  Here's a few things for you to contemplate:  

1.  "Merit alone" really makes no sense.  What might the definition of "merit" be for a poem?  Who might the anonymous person or persons be to define the term?  Without a concrete definition, it remains vacuous.  Judging poems is entirely subjective.  But the term "merit" gives it some kind of vague, false objectivity. 

2.  "There are no restrictions on subject or style" is simply NOT true, so why make the statement? Examples of subject restrictions would likely include poems critical of pillars of the Cape Cod community, as well as cultural institutions, including the Cultural Center of Cape Cod from which Bass River Press was hatched.  They'd likely also include personal experience poems critical of the cultural scene on Cape Cod, which tends to abhor criticism and manifest apathy regarding democracy (e.g., issues of freedom of speech and due process).  Also, business and poetry have become far too intimately connected today and here on the Cape.  

3.  Why the $20 submission fee?  That seems quite unusual for a poetry journal.  I publish such a journal and never require a fee.  Besides, with your connections, surely you'd be able to haul in a bundle of taxpayer money from the Mid-Cape Cultural Council, which will NEVER accord my journal a dime because of its dissident stance.  

Finally, ”All the Art for All of US" is a hypocritical logo.  And "a democratic philosophy of inclusion" is downright Orwellian, especially coming from a cultural autocrat like Robert Nash, who has excluded all of my art from his Cultural Center.  How does that jive with that logo?  Most poets (99%) do not dare question and challenge people like Nash and institutions like his.  So when out of the blue a poet like me appears, the only reaction tends to be non-response.  After all, what could Nash possilby respond regarding, for example, criticism of the logo?  Questioning and challenging the Nashs clearly constitutes a hazardous risk to poetry and academic careers.  Sadly, most poets and academics prefer conformity and ladder climbing to bold truth telling.  Well, now you know who I am.  Anyhow, thanks again for the response.

G. Tod

Sunday, June 27, 2021

Kristina Joyce

 Below is a cartoon I sketched in 2010.  


Saturday, June 19, 2021

Tim Green Megan O'Reilly Rattle

The above watercolor depicts Tim Green and wife Megan O'Reilly, editor and co-editor of Rattle, a literary journal (see previous blog on Rattle). Many others could have been selected and put behind the intellectually-restricting established-order bars. Well, I’ve saved them for other satires. I do have to give Tim credit because now and then he, unlike scores of others, does open up to debate, especially debate that cannot further his career. I was disappointed, however, in his censoring of comments made by David Ochs and perhaps others, as well as his closing down of certain debate forums. Censorship in any of its subtle and sleezy rationalized forms should simply not exist in the literary arena, not in a democratic society. If you favor censorship, then become a businessman or politician or professor, not a literary editor. P. Maudit and Mather Schneider are depicted as trolls, which in Internet terminology constitute persons who disrupt the happy-face ambiance of blogs with sledgehammer criticism. In any case, those who would reject vigorous debate, cornerstone of democracy, normally do so out of fear—fear of being ridiculed, fear of being exposed for intellectual fraud, and fear of engaging with social “inferiors.” If I were behind an academic pulpet, I’d tell students Do not fear to engage with someone simply because of his name, occupation and/or laurels. What will make you a formidable adversary will be unwavering logic backed by fact and example, and, of course, willingness to bend when proven incorrect.
[This is not a poem!]