Digital & Print Membership
Yearly + Receive 8 free printed back issues
$420 Annually
Monthly + Receive 3 free printed back issues
$40 Monthly
Special Feature:
Reclaiming Feminism and Collective Liberation
Mia Khalifa & Céline Semaan on Healing, Identity, and Political Awakening
Reclaiming Feminism and Collective Liberation

CÉLINE SEMAAN: I have so many questions—they are a bit intense. So we are going to start with the intensity immediately… Anjed we woke up and the news was so disgusting. I mean this is our reality.
We joke and laugh because we’ve developed this amazing sense of humor, but the world we’ve grown up in has been very very intense. We’ve mastered the art of talking about heavy issues, making it personal because everything is political right?
MIA KHALIFA: Everything.
CÉLINE: I wrote something recently, about how ‘free Palestine’ is also about Lebanon. The Lebanese endured 35 years of war and genocide in Lebanon, all before social media existed. Back then, the media painted us as terrorists, manufacturing consent for the bombings. It’s a humanitarian crisis that’s rarely discussed, though as Lebanese people, it’s been our lived experience.
You and I both grew up in Lebanon. Today, waking up to what’s happening in South Lebanon, Dahiyeh, and Tyre, with 200 people killed just today, is heartbreaking. I hope when this is published, it’s over, but I’m not holding my breath.
As women, especially Arab women, we’ve faced oppression, both from conservative and so-called progressive spaces. How do you reconcile feminism when it doesn’t seem to include us?
MIA: That’s a very good question. Honestly, it’s only in the last few years, as I’ve grown older, that I’ve been able to reconcile those feelings. I realized that you can only control your own views and actions. For a long time, I was immaturely angry at feminism because I felt excluded from it. I felt ostracized, so I responded by rejecting it and, unfortunately, internalizing a lot of misogyny. I didn’t feel supported by that community for much of my life.
I grew up in a predominantly white, predominantly Jewish area in Washington, DC, and Maryland. I didn’t see much support from feminist circles there. It wasn’t until I got older, traveled, and found community with women of color—Indigenous, Latinx, and especially Lebanese and Arab women—that I started to understand. It took time, but I get why others struggle to reconcile their place within feminism. It wasn’t until I got older that I began to find my own.

CÉLINE: Growing up in constant war, having to flee over and over. I’ve moved so many times. Just this morning, I was on a call with my parents, and they’re preparing to flee Lebanon again with everything that’s going on. I’ve lost count of how many times they’ve had to leave and come back. It makes you rethink what home really means.
So now, sitting here in a hotel, I wonder, what does “home” mean to you?
MIA: Home, for me, is hearing your accent and having manoushes around the table. That’s what makes it feel like home—those little reminders that are so important. It’s all that really matters. As long as you’re surrounded by the right people, that’s it.
CÉLINE: This morning, as I was buying manoushe and heading to see you, I felt like, “Wow, I feel at home in New York,” just knowing there’s this place I can go to for that familiar taste. I literally inhaled that manoushe while watching the news, and it hit me—wherever we go, we’re transporting our home with us. It sounds cheesy, but anjad it’s true. We carry it within us—our bodies, our everything. We bring home wherever we are.
MIA: Growing up, the only thing we ever ate at home was Lebanese food, of course. But after moving to America, going out to different restaurants and trying new cuisines became a bit of a tradition. I remember one time we went out for Thai food, and my grandma brought a little Tupperware of tarator to eat with the fried fish.
CÉLINE: No way! That’s so cute!
MIA: At one point, the Thai restaurant actually asked if they could taste it, and then they asked her for the recipe so they could make it themselves—because the fried fish went so perfectly with the tarator.
That’s what home is. You make it wherever you are, even in a foreign restaurant eating a cuisine you’ve never had before. It’s one of my favorite stories about her—she’s an icon!
CÉLINE: That’s so cool! Growing up here, my parents also had a restaurant, and even though it wasn’t a Lebanese restaurant, but my mom made everything Lebanese! It was so fusion. She’d cook American dishes, but with a Lebanese twist. You want a hamburger? We make it kafta burger.
MIA: Sure, but with seven spices! Literally everything had that touch. I put that on everything. Za’atar too.
CÉLINE: What do you put za’atar on?!
MIA: Literally everything! I’ll even put za’atar on my cheese pizza—especially if it’s New York style. It’s so good when it mixes with the grease, like yum! It sounds wild, but honestly, it works!
‘For a long time, I was immaturely angry at feminism because I felt excluded from it. I felt ostracized, so I responded by rejecting it and, unfortunately, internalizing a lot of misogyny. I didn’t feel supported by that community for much of my life.’ — Mia

CÉLINE: Let’s circle back to Everything is Political. Your whole life has been about liberation—liberating our bodies, minds, sexuality, and beauty. What does collective liberation mean to you?
MIA: To me, it’s as simple as the idea that none of us are free until Palestine is free. I don’t see that as a radical statement at all—it perfectly captures the sentiment. It’s a no-brainer for me. I get why you feel the need to defend it, because people probably ask, “What does that mean?” But honestly, if they’re asking, they might not want to get it. It’s always been clear: liberation means everyone. It’s not exclusive, and no one person or group is more entitled to it than another. We all have to work together.
CÉLINE: Even in the U.S., you’ve always advocated for a free Palestine, even before October 7. But since then, with the escalation of violence, the Free Palestine movement has transformed. The world has changed in how America views us and how America sees itself.
From your perspective, what have you observed regarding the sudden embrace of the Free Palestine movement? It used to feel niche and unwelcome, and it’s still not completely accepted— there’s significant censorship and backlash. But it does seem like there are way more people now willing to support the cause, doesn’t it?
MIA: Yeah, exactly. It’s hard to ignore the reality when people who were once neutral or wanted to stay out of it are now realizing just how egregious this situation is. This is pure genocide backed by Western powers, and it’s terrifying. The veil has been lifted, and we’re starting to see the ugly truths of how the world operates—and how it could operate differently if there was the will to change things.
It’s a wake-up call. Watching this unfold for so long, seeing it happen so blatantly, and witnessing the constant stream of heartbreaking videos… It’s heartbreaking that the pain of Arabs has to be exploited like this for people to finally believe it. It’s disgusting and incredibly hurtful.
CÉLINE: You know, sometimes we find ourselves advocating not just for our rights but for our very survival. At the same time, we’re human—we’re evolving, changing, and transforming. I feel a responsibility to ask you about the criticism you’ve received regarding the fetishization of the hijab, for instance. What are your thoughts on that criticism? How do you navigate those conversations, especially given the complexities involved?
MIA: I feel like that criticism is very valid because it comes from a place of young women feeling sexualized for something they didn’t do. I understand that I’m an easy person to target; I’m a public figure, and people can leave comments on my photos and tag me, making it simple to pinpoint the issue onto me.
I have immense compassion for those women and feel a deep guilt that an innocent young woman is being fetishized for something she chooses to embrace as part of her religious beliefs. But I think, as women, we should focus on the larger issue—the patriarchal system that promotes this, produces this and distributes this, which continues to fetishize women. Even if they’re not using Arab actresses, they’re often casting Latin women who could pass as Arab. I’m not the first nor the last to face this; I’m just the one people can identify because there’s a face connected to the name and to the action.
CÉLINE: Absolutely. When we talk about feminism and this idea of purity, it often feels like you have to come from a place of purity to advocate for human rights, right? Do you feel that pressure? It’s almost as if you have to be a saint to be taken seriously in these conversations. What are your thoughts on that?
MIA KHALIFA: Oh my gosh, I completely disagree with that! Most of us don’t come into these mindsets from a place of purity. Many of us are traumatized individuals dealing with so much that we need to work through to reach these realizations. I wasn’t the same person I was even five or six years ago; my thoughts were nowhere near what they are now.
I know it might sound insane, but every single thing I see radicalizes me further and further. The way I thought when I was 20 was influenced by my own internalized misogyny and racism, along with many other issues that shaped my actions and beliefs. But then I started going to therapy and delving deeper into myself, actually growing into my identity. That’s why I feel so secure in who I am now.
CÉLINE: Criticism can be so harsh. Yet in this movement for liberation, there seems to be a punitive mindset, a carceral approach that contradicts the very essence of liberation. The idea that you can publicly punish someone or correct them through harassment is so counterproductive. How do you feel about this? Where do you draw the boundary, and how do you navigate your own evolution and transformation in this public space?
‘The veil has been lifted, and we’re starting to see the ugly truths of how the world operates— and how it could operate differently if there was the will to change things.’ —Mia

MIA: You just have to give people grace. It’s essential to consider intentions before judging actions. At the end of the day, it comes down to listening, understanding, and being empathetic and compassionate when it’s necessary. Of course, not everyone deserves that grace, but for those who do, it can make all the difference.
Ultimately, I believe that to grow and transform in this world, you have to embrace contradictions. You can’t change without acknowledging that you might have to contradict yourself along the way.
CÉLINE: It’s all about grace and generosity. We often discuss radical generosity in our culture. In Arab culture, it’s like this dance where you fight to pay the bill or show up at someone’s house with more than enough. There’s a deep-rooted understanding that sharing and giving are essential parts of our community.
MIA: Oh, exactly! You call ahead and show up at the restaurant six hours early just to slip your credit card to cover the bill. Then you leave and come back, saying, “Oh, I’m so sorry I was late!” It’s all part of that generous spirit.
CÉLINE: Yes, exactly! There’s this radical generosity that you embody so well through your constant acts of giving. I’d love to hear how your approach to giving has evolved and how you’re seeing the impact of your actions. Where do you want to focus your generosity now?
MIA: Thank you for saying that; it really means a lot. I’ve always felt this innate need to contribute because you’re not truly deserving of anything if you’re not also supporting your community. It’s like a mental version of Reaganomics that actually could work if it weren’t so corrupt! That’s how community is supposed to function.
But as I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to realize there’s a big difference between just giving and giving with purpose.
CÉLINE: Your recent tweet really resonated with us: “You get to a point in life when you realize everything is political—the brands you support, the places you patronize, the celebrities you platform, and even the people you date. If they’re not at least trying to be informed, have a stance, and be vocal, then they’re not in alignment.” This was so powerful, especially since we just launched our “Everything is Political” initiative. We knew we wanted to be in conversation with you, and this tweet felt like a perfect alignment!
MIA: Just a couple of years ago, I might have been okay with friends who said things like, “Oh no, I stay out of all that.” But now, if I hear someone say that, I’m genuinely taken aback. Like, what do you mean? It feels almost robotic, like they’re disengaged from reality. We all have a responsibility to each other, regardless of our backgrounds.
Whether you’re walking down the street or staying in a hotel, every action counts. Holding the door open for someone behind you or treating housekeeping staff with respect—these seemingly small gestures reflect our shared humanity. It’s all interconnected, and we need to recognize that our choices impact those around us. Every single role we play comes with responsibility, and it’s time we embrace that fully.
CÉLINE: I feel like that’s very cultural to us, like the idea of responsibility. This is how we were raised—to really understand our place in the world and our responsibility in it. This brings me to addressing “poverty porn”, by showing images of dying brown kids covered in blood.
There’s a gap between that and our dignity as humans. Those images actually hurt our dignity. People say this is one of the most documented genocides, yet it’s not moving the needle because many don’t even see us as human.
So, we started this idea of building a fund for collective liberation so that we can put our money in multiple places at once. It’s not just about feeding the poor or educating the uneducated—categories that are ultimately so colonial. We wanted a fund that was more holistic because it’s a case-by- case situation.
There’s no standardized way to heal the world; it has to be designed in a modular way that fluctuates with the situation. I feel like Arabs understand this inherently, especially Lebanese and people from the Levant. The ways in which we have survived could not have happened if we were stuck in a one- track, standardized mindset. This idea of a fund for collective liberation came to be, and I know it spoke to you. In what ways did it resonate with you?
MIA: That’s exactly the reason. The fact that I don’t just have to commit to education—because education is so important—but if a tragedy strikes, which unfortunately has been happening way too often, I want to be partnered with an organization that can go with the ebb and flow of life. When, thankfully, things are quiet and good, we can fund arts, education, and other things that are important for culture.
CÉLINE: I’m so grateful to be in community with you. I wanted to ask you, oftentimes people ask, “What would you tell your younger self?” But I feel like the question could also be, “What do you think your younger self would say and do now?” Like, what’s your inner child saying to you these days? I feel like there’s a lot of repair we have to do in reconciling with our inner child.
For me personally, my whole healing journey and all of my therapy sessions have focused on my inner child because she’s someone who was born in a war, fled the war, and experienced a lot of neglect. I’m sure that you can relate because you were in Lebanon during that time as well. Our parents were stressed, and we were being neglected.
Now, looking at what’s happening in Gaza, there’s a war on children currently happening, and I feel like our inner children are acting up—they’re being vocal. What does Sarah’s inner child say?
MIA: She says, “Thank you for caring about making sure there’s a place for me to go back to, and thank you for not being ashamed of me anymore. Thank you for doing all the things I would have wanted to do. And can I borrow your shoes?” What does yours say?
CÉLINE: Mine says, “Thank you for being the person who protects me, the person who would have held me and cared for me. Thank you for doing everything you can to ensure that people like us have a place to be, and for never forgetting that you are me.” You know, I’m very much a kid at heart. I mean, I feel like the biggest conversation is about healing, you know? I want to ask you, what’s your practice for healing? How did you invite healing into your life?
MIA: Therapy and mushrooms.
CÉLINE: Oh, wow! yes.
‘Just a couple of years ago, I might have been okay with friends who said things like, “Oh no, I stay out of all that.” But now, if I hear someone say that, I’m genuinely taken aback. Like, what do you mean? It feels almost robotic, like they’re disengaged from reality. We all have a responsibility to each other, regardless of our backgrounds.’
—Mia

MIA: Ya.
CÉLINE: That helped you?
MIA: What caused me to start going to therapy was really just being fed up. I’ve never been against it, so it wasn’t a hard sell.
CÉLINE: Sometimes, culturally, we’re like, “Oh, we’re fine, we’re fine, we’re fine,” you know? And then we don’t take the time.
MIA: I was just in denial. Finally, it got to a point where there was one specific moment where I exploded on a radio host during an interview. The way they introduced me triggered me and felt very disrespectful. It was a sports show, and I just didn’t feel like the way they introduced me was respectful. I exploded on them, and then I got a fine from the SEC because it was live radio, and it went viral. People were like, “This bitch is crazy,” and I was like, “Yeah, this bitch is crazy. She needs to go to therapy, actually.”
So, I went to therapy, and then I realized, oh, that was a trigger because I have unhealed shame from unhealed trauma—from things I did because of my unhealed trauma. So that was the catalyst. Psilocybin and mushrooms has been a lot more recent. When I got access to it in California, it was first in chocolate form, then in gummy form. I started microdosing, and then I worked my way up to proper psilocybin, like just grown mushrooms. I have someone guiding me, or sometimes I follow a schedule. My microdosing is very self-guided. I’ll do a cacao ceremony with a spiritual guide or in a group setting, in a very positive environment. But with microdosing, I just wake up in the morning and decide what flavor I want.
CÉLINE: That’s amazing! I did that for the first time in Montreal when I was in my 20s. Yeah, in my 20s, we would make Nutella sandwiches and put a ton of mushrooms in them, then go out and walk in the forest all day, eating the Nutella sandwiches. It was life-altering for me. I started understanding so much; I did my own little healing, doing that therapy in nature—eating a Nutella sandwich with my friends, walking all day, laughing, and just being in nature.
But then one time, we went inside a little too early, and I realized that if you’re very high on mushrooms and you’re indoors…I got SCARED.
MIA: No, no, I did it at Universal Studios.
CÉLINE: Yeah, it was not okay. No, you cannot be around people. I saw myself in the mirror, and I was like, “No, don’t ever look at yourself in the mirror!”I see why you’re guided now because I did it by myself in my 20s, and now it’s so common, right? There’s a big transformation in the healing space where people are finally recognizing the beauty of it and the power of plant medicine. You did it at Universal Studios?
MIA: I did it at Universal Studios! I cried on the Hogwarts Express, and people had to come and ask my friend, “Is your friend okay?” It was bad. We threw up in the bushes.
In Conversation:
Photography by:
Céline Semaan (author, founder and Slow Factory Creative Director) chats with Mia Khalifa (entrepreneur, digital creator, philanthropist & human rights activist) over manousheh. The two discuss how they navigate being a Lebanese woman in America at this time, Global South generosity, politics, making home in the diaspora and how they reconciled their heritage with their own path to create the type of world they want.
Topics:
Filed under:
Location:
{
"article":
{
"title" : "Reclaiming Feminism and Collective Liberation: Mia Khalifa & Céline Semaan on Healing, Identity, and Political Awakening",
"author" : "Mia Khalifa, Céline Semaan",
"category" : "interviews",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/mia-khalifa-celine-semaan-reclaiming-feminism-collective-liberation",
"date" : "2024-11-01 13:56:00 -0400",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/MIA_IEP_9-thumb.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "CÉLINE SEMAAN: I have so many questions—they are a bit intense. So we are going to start with the intensity immediately… Anjed we woke up and the news was so disgusting. I mean this is our reality.We joke and laugh because we’ve developed this amazing sense of humor, but the world we’ve grown up in has been very very intense. We’ve mastered the art of talking about heavy issues, making it personal because everything is political right?MIA KHALIFA: Everything.CÉLINE: I wrote something recently, about how ‘free Palestine’ is also about Lebanon. The Lebanese endured 35 years of war and genocide in Lebanon, all before social media existed. Back then, the media painted us as terrorists, manufacturing consent for the bombings. It’s a humanitarian crisis that’s rarely discussed, though as Lebanese people, it’s been our lived experience.You and I both grew up in Lebanon. Today, waking up to what’s happening in South Lebanon, Dahiyeh, and Tyre, with 200 people killed just today, is heartbreaking. I hope when this is published, it’s over, but I’m not holding my breath.As women, especially Arab women, we’ve faced oppression, both from conservative and so-called progressive spaces. How do you reconcile feminism when it doesn’t seem to include us?MIA: That’s a very good question. Honestly, it’s only in the last few years, as I’ve grown older, that I’ve been able to reconcile those feelings. I realized that you can only control your own views and actions. For a long time, I was immaturely angry at feminism because I felt excluded from it. I felt ostracized, so I responded by rejecting it and, unfortunately, internalizing a lot of misogyny. I didn’t feel supported by that community for much of my life.I grew up in a predominantly white, predominantly Jewish area in Washington, DC, and Maryland. I didn’t see much support from feminist circles there. It wasn’t until I got older, traveled, and found community with women of color—Indigenous, Latinx, and especially Lebanese and Arab women—that I started to understand. It took time, but I get why others struggle to reconcile their place within feminism. It wasn’t until I got older that I began to find my own.CÉLINE: Growing up in constant war, having to flee over and over. I’ve moved so many times. Just this morning, I was on a call with my parents, and they’re preparing to flee Lebanon again with everything that’s going on. I’ve lost count of how many times they’ve had to leave and come back. It makes you rethink what home really means.So now, sitting here in a hotel, I wonder, what does “home” mean to you?MIA: Home, for me, is hearing your accent and having manoushes around the table. That’s what makes it feel like home—those little reminders that are so important. It’s all that really matters. As long as you’re surrounded by the right people, that’s it.CÉLINE: This morning, as I was buying manoushe and heading to see you, I felt like, “Wow, I feel at home in New York,” just knowing there’s this place I can go to for that familiar taste. I literally inhaled that manoushe while watching the news, and it hit me—wherever we go, we’re transporting our home with us. It sounds cheesy, but anjad it’s true. We carry it within us—our bodies, our everything. We bring home wherever we are.MIA: Growing up, the only thing we ever ate at home was Lebanese food, of course. But after moving to America, going out to different restaurants and trying new cuisines became a bit of a tradition. I remember one time we went out for Thai food, and my grandma brought a little Tupperware of tarator to eat with the fried fish.CÉLINE: No way! That’s so cute!MIA: At one point, the Thai restaurant actually asked if they could taste it, and then they asked her for the recipe so they could make it themselves—because the fried fish went so perfectly with the tarator.That’s what home is. You make it wherever you are, even in a foreign restaurant eating a cuisine you’ve never had before. It’s one of my favorite stories about her—she’s an icon!CÉLINE: That’s so cool! Growing up here, my parents also had a restaurant, and even though it wasn’t a Lebanese restaurant, but my mom made everything Lebanese! It was so fusion. She’d cook American dishes, but with a Lebanese twist. You want a hamburger? We make it kafta burger.MIA: Sure, but with seven spices! Literally everything had that touch. I put that on everything. Za’atar too.CÉLINE: What do you put za’atar on?!MIA: Literally everything! I’ll even put za’atar on my cheese pizza—especially if it’s New York style. It’s so good when it mixes with the grease, like yum! It sounds wild, but honestly, it works!‘For a long time, I was immaturely angry at feminism because I felt excluded from it. I felt ostracized, so I responded by rejecting it and, unfortunately, internalizing a lot of misogyny. I didn’t feel supported by that community for much of my life.’ — MiaCÉLINE: Let’s circle back to Everything is Political. Your whole life has been about liberation—liberating our bodies, minds, sexuality, and beauty. What does collective liberation mean to you?MIA: To me, it’s as simple as the idea that none of us are free until Palestine is free. I don’t see that as a radical statement at all—it perfectly captures the sentiment. It’s a no-brainer for me. I get why you feel the need to defend it, because people probably ask, “What does that mean?” But honestly, if they’re asking, they might not want to get it. It’s always been clear: liberation means everyone. It’s not exclusive, and no one person or group is more entitled to it than another. We all have to work together.CÉLINE: Even in the U.S., you’ve always advocated for a free Palestine, even before October 7. But since then, with the escalation of violence, the Free Palestine movement has transformed. The world has changed in how America views us and how America sees itself.From your perspective, what have you observed regarding the sudden embrace of the Free Palestine movement? It used to feel niche and unwelcome, and it’s still not completely accepted— there’s significant censorship and backlash. But it does seem like there are way more people now willing to support the cause, doesn’t it?MIA: Yeah, exactly. It’s hard to ignore the reality when people who were once neutral or wanted to stay out of it are now realizing just how egregious this situation is. This is pure genocide backed by Western powers, and it’s terrifying. The veil has been lifted, and we’re starting to see the ugly truths of how the world operates—and how it could operate differently if there was the will to change things.It’s a wake-up call. Watching this unfold for so long, seeing it happen so blatantly, and witnessing the constant stream of heartbreaking videos… It’s heartbreaking that the pain of Arabs has to be exploited like this for people to finally believe it. It’s disgusting and incredibly hurtful.CÉLINE: You know, sometimes we find ourselves advocating not just for our rights but for our very survival. At the same time, we’re human—we’re evolving, changing, and transforming. I feel a responsibility to ask you about the criticism you’ve received regarding the fetishization of the hijab, for instance. What are your thoughts on that criticism? How do you navigate those conversations, especially given the complexities involved?MIA: I feel like that criticism is very valid because it comes from a place of young women feeling sexualized for something they didn’t do. I understand that I’m an easy person to target; I’m a public figure, and people can leave comments on my photos and tag me, making it simple to pinpoint the issue onto me.I have immense compassion for those women and feel a deep guilt that an innocent young woman is being fetishized for something she chooses to embrace as part of her religious beliefs. But I think, as women, we should focus on the larger issue—the patriarchal system that promotes this, produces this and distributes this, which continues to fetishize women. Even if they’re not using Arab actresses, they’re often casting Latin women who could pass as Arab. I’m not the first nor the last to face this; I’m just the one people can identify because there’s a face connected to the name and to the action.CÉLINE: Absolutely. When we talk about feminism and this idea of purity, it often feels like you have to come from a place of purity to advocate for human rights, right? Do you feel that pressure? It’s almost as if you have to be a saint to be taken seriously in these conversations. What are your thoughts on that?MIA KHALIFA: Oh my gosh, I completely disagree with that! Most of us don’t come into these mindsets from a place of purity. Many of us are traumatized individuals dealing with so much that we need to work through to reach these realizations. I wasn’t the same person I was even five or six years ago; my thoughts were nowhere near what they are now.I know it might sound insane, but every single thing I see radicalizes me further and further. The way I thought when I was 20 was influenced by my own internalized misogyny and racism, along with many other issues that shaped my actions and beliefs. But then I started going to therapy and delving deeper into myself, actually growing into my identity. That’s why I feel so secure in who I am now.CÉLINE: Criticism can be so harsh. Yet in this movement for liberation, there seems to be a punitive mindset, a carceral approach that contradicts the very essence of liberation. The idea that you can publicly punish someone or correct them through harassment is so counterproductive. How do you feel about this? Where do you draw the boundary, and how do you navigate your own evolution and transformation in this public space?‘The veil has been lifted, and we’re starting to see the ugly truths of how the world operates— and how it could operate differently if there was the will to change things.’ —MiaMIA: You just have to give people grace. It’s essential to consider intentions before judging actions. At the end of the day, it comes down to listening, understanding, and being empathetic and compassionate when it’s necessary. Of course, not everyone deserves that grace, but for those who do, it can make all the difference.Ultimately, I believe that to grow and transform in this world, you have to embrace contradictions. You can’t change without acknowledging that you might have to contradict yourself along the way.CÉLINE: It’s all about grace and generosity. We often discuss radical generosity in our culture. In Arab culture, it’s like this dance where you fight to pay the bill or show up at someone’s house with more than enough. There’s a deep-rooted understanding that sharing and giving are essential parts of our community.MIA: Oh, exactly! You call ahead and show up at the restaurant six hours early just to slip your credit card to cover the bill. Then you leave and come back, saying, “Oh, I’m so sorry I was late!” It’s all part of that generous spirit.CÉLINE: Yes, exactly! There’s this radical generosity that you embody so well through your constant acts of giving. I’d love to hear how your approach to giving has evolved and how you’re seeing the impact of your actions. Where do you want to focus your generosity now?MIA: Thank you for saying that; it really means a lot. I’ve always felt this innate need to contribute because you’re not truly deserving of anything if you’re not also supporting your community. It’s like a mental version of Reaganomics that actually could work if it weren’t so corrupt! That’s how community is supposed to function.But as I’ve gotten older, I’ve come to realize there’s a big difference between just giving and giving with purpose.CÉLINE: Your recent tweet really resonated with us: “You get to a point in life when you realize everything is political—the brands you support, the places you patronize, the celebrities you platform, and even the people you date. If they’re not at least trying to be informed, have a stance, and be vocal, then they’re not in alignment.” This was so powerful, especially since we just launched our “Everything is Political” initiative. We knew we wanted to be in conversation with you, and this tweet felt like a perfect alignment!MIA: Just a couple of years ago, I might have been okay with friends who said things like, “Oh no, I stay out of all that.” But now, if I hear someone say that, I’m genuinely taken aback. Like, what do you mean? It feels almost robotic, like they’re disengaged from reality. We all have a responsibility to each other, regardless of our backgrounds.Whether you’re walking down the street or staying in a hotel, every action counts. Holding the door open for someone behind you or treating housekeeping staff with respect—these seemingly small gestures reflect our shared humanity. It’s all interconnected, and we need to recognize that our choices impact those around us. Every single role we play comes with responsibility, and it’s time we embrace that fully.CÉLINE: I feel like that’s very cultural to us, like the idea of responsibility. This is how we were raised—to really understand our place in the world and our responsibility in it. This brings me to addressing “poverty porn”, by showing images of dying brown kids covered in blood.There’s a gap between that and our dignity as humans. Those images actually hurt our dignity. People say this is one of the most documented genocides, yet it’s not moving the needle because many don’t even see us as human.So, we started this idea of building a fund for collective liberation so that we can put our money in multiple places at once. It’s not just about feeding the poor or educating the uneducated—categories that are ultimately so colonial. We wanted a fund that was more holistic because it’s a case-by- case situation.There’s no standardized way to heal the world; it has to be designed in a modular way that fluctuates with the situation. I feel like Arabs understand this inherently, especially Lebanese and people from the Levant. The ways in which we have survived could not have happened if we were stuck in a one- track, standardized mindset. This idea of a fund for collective liberation came to be, and I know it spoke to you. In what ways did it resonate with you?MIA: That’s exactly the reason. The fact that I don’t just have to commit to education—because education is so important—but if a tragedy strikes, which unfortunately has been happening way too often, I want to be partnered with an organization that can go with the ebb and flow of life. When, thankfully, things are quiet and good, we can fund arts, education, and other things that are important for culture.CÉLINE: I’m so grateful to be in community with you. I wanted to ask you, oftentimes people ask, “What would you tell your younger self?” But I feel like the question could also be, “What do you think your younger self would say and do now?” Like, what’s your inner child saying to you these days? I feel like there’s a lot of repair we have to do in reconciling with our inner child.For me personally, my whole healing journey and all of my therapy sessions have focused on my inner child because she’s someone who was born in a war, fled the war, and experienced a lot of neglect. I’m sure that you can relate because you were in Lebanon during that time as well. Our parents were stressed, and we were being neglected.Now, looking at what’s happening in Gaza, there’s a war on children currently happening, and I feel like our inner children are acting up—they’re being vocal. What does Sarah’s inner child say?MIA: She says, “Thank you for caring about making sure there’s a place for me to go back to, and thank you for not being ashamed of me anymore. Thank you for doing all the things I would have wanted to do. And can I borrow your shoes?” What does yours say?CÉLINE: Mine says, “Thank you for being the person who protects me, the person who would have held me and cared for me. Thank you for doing everything you can to ensure that people like us have a place to be, and for never forgetting that you are me.” You know, I’m very much a kid at heart. I mean, I feel like the biggest conversation is about healing, you know? I want to ask you, what’s your practice for healing? How did you invite healing into your life?MIA: Therapy and mushrooms.CÉLINE: Oh, wow! yes.‘Just a couple of years ago, I might have been okay with friends who said things like, “Oh no, I stay out of all that.” But now, if I hear someone say that, I’m genuinely taken aback. Like, what do you mean? It feels almost robotic, like they’re disengaged from reality. We all have a responsibility to each other, regardless of our backgrounds.’—MiaMIA: Ya.CÉLINE: That helped you?MIA: What caused me to start going to therapy was really just being fed up. I’ve never been against it, so it wasn’t a hard sell.CÉLINE: Sometimes, culturally, we’re like, “Oh, we’re fine, we’re fine, we’re fine,” you know? And then we don’t take the time.MIA: I was just in denial. Finally, it got to a point where there was one specific moment where I exploded on a radio host during an interview. The way they introduced me triggered me and felt very disrespectful. It was a sports show, and I just didn’t feel like the way they introduced me was respectful. I exploded on them, and then I got a fine from the SEC because it was live radio, and it went viral. People were like, “This bitch is crazy,” and I was like, “Yeah, this bitch is crazy. She needs to go to therapy, actually.”So, I went to therapy, and then I realized, oh, that was a trigger because I have unhealed shame from unhealed trauma—from things I did because of my unhealed trauma. So that was the catalyst. Psilocybin and mushrooms has been a lot more recent. When I got access to it in California, it was first in chocolate form, then in gummy form. I started microdosing, and then I worked my way up to proper psilocybin, like just grown mushrooms. I have someone guiding me, or sometimes I follow a schedule. My microdosing is very self-guided. I’ll do a cacao ceremony with a spiritual guide or in a group setting, in a very positive environment. But with microdosing, I just wake up in the morning and decide what flavor I want.CÉLINE: That’s amazing! I did that for the first time in Montreal when I was in my 20s. Yeah, in my 20s, we would make Nutella sandwiches and put a ton of mushrooms in them, then go out and walk in the forest all day, eating the Nutella sandwiches. It was life-altering for me. I started understanding so much; I did my own little healing, doing that therapy in nature—eating a Nutella sandwich with my friends, walking all day, laughing, and just being in nature.But then one time, we went inside a little too early, and I realized that if you’re very high on mushrooms and you’re indoors…I got SCARED.MIA: No, no, I did it at Universal Studios.CÉLINE: Yeah, it was not okay. No, you cannot be around people. I saw myself in the mirror, and I was like, “No, don’t ever look at yourself in the mirror!”I see why you’re guided now because I did it by myself in my 20s, and now it’s so common, right? There’s a big transformation in the healing space where people are finally recognizing the beauty of it and the power of plant medicine. You did it at Universal Studios?MIA: I did it at Universal Studios! I cried on the Hogwarts Express, and people had to come and ask my friend, “Is your friend okay?” It was bad. We threw up in the bushes."
}
,
"relatedposts": [
{
"title" : "What We Can Learn from the Inuit Mapping of the Arctic",
"author" : "William Rankin",
"category" : "excerpts",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/inuit-mapping-arctic",
"date" : "2025-12-02 12:49:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_Template-Inuit_Map.jpg",
"excerpt" : "This excerpt is from RADICAL CARTOGRAPHY by William Rankin, published by Viking, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2025 by William Rankin.",
"content" : "This excerpt is from RADICAL CARTOGRAPHY by William Rankin, published by Viking, an imprint of Penguin Publishing Group, a division of Penguin Random House, LLC. Copyright © 2025 by William Rankin.In 1994, the Berkeley geographer Bernard Nietschmann made a famous claim about the power of mapping in the global struggle for Indigenous rights. It was a claim about how the tools of historical oppression could be reclaimed by the oppressed: “More Indigenous territory has been claimed by maps than by guns. This assertion has its corollary: more Indigenous territory can be defended and reclaimed by maps than by guns.” The idea was that by putting themselves on the map—documenting their lives and their communities—Indigenous peoples would not be so easy to erase. Nietschmann was working in Central America, often heroically, during a time of violence and displacement, and he inspired a generation of researchers and activists interested in flipping the power structure of state-centric cartography on its head.But despite the spread of bottom-up mapping projects in the past 30 years, perhaps the most successful example of Indigenous mapping actually predates Nietschmann’s call to action. Just one year prior, in 1993, the Inuit of northern Canada signed a treaty creating the territory of Nunavut—the largest self-governing Indigenous territory in the world—and mapping was central to both the negotiation and the outcome. It remains one of the rare cases of Indigenous geographic knowledge decolonizing the world map.So why hasn’t the Inuit project been replicable elsewhere, despite decades more work on Indigenous mapping? The answer lies in the very idea of territory itself, and in particular in one of the most threatened parts of the Inuit landscape today: ice. The winter extent of Arctic sea ice reached a record low earlier this year, and a new low is predicted for the winter ahead. Yet the shrinking ice isn’t just an unshakable sign of Arctic warming; it’s also a poignant reminder of what Nietschmann got right—and what he missed—about the relationship between cartography and power. In particular, it shows how Inuit conceptions of space, place, and belonging are rooted in a dynamic, seasonal geography that’s often completely invisible on Western-style maps.The story begins in the 1970s, when the young Inuit leader Tagak Curley, today considered a “living father” of Nunavut, hired the Arctic anthropologist Milton Freeman to lead a collaborative mapping project of unprecedented scope and ambition. Freeman taught at McMaster University about an hour outside Toronto; he was white, but his wife, Mini Aodla Freeman, was Inuit (she was a translator and later a celebrated writer). Freeman assembled a team of other anthropologists and Arctic geographers—also white—to split the mapping into regions. They called their method the “map biography.” The goal was to capture the life history of every Inuit hunter in cartographic form, recording each person’s memories of where, at any point in their life, they had found roughly three dozen species of wildlife—from caribou and ptarmigan to beluga, narwhal, and seaweed. Each map biography would be a testimony of personal experience.After the mapping was split into regions, about 150 field-workers—almost all Inuit—traveled between 33 northern settlements with a stack of government-issued topographic maps to conduct interviews. Each hunter was asked to draw lines or shapes directly on the maps with colored pens or pencils. The interviewers stayed about 10 weeks in each settlement, visiting most hunters in their own homes, and the final participation rate was an astonishing 85 percent of all adult Inuit men. They collected 1,600 biographies in total, some on maps as large as 10 feet square.Then came the cartographers, back in Ontario: one professor and a team of about 15 students. The first map below (Figure 1) shows how the individual map biographies were transformed into summary maps, one for each community. For every species, the overlap of all hunters’ testimony became a single blob, and then blobs for all species were overlaid to make a complete map. The second map (Figure 2) shows one of the finished atlas pages along the Northwest Passage. The immediate impression is that the Arctic is in no way an empty expanse of barren land and unclaimed mineral riches. It is dense with human activity, necessary for personal and collective survival. The community maps combined to show almost uninterrupted Inuit presence stretching from northern Labrador to the Alaska border.Figure 1: Top left is a simplified version of a “map biography” from a single Inuit hunter, showing his birthplace and the places he hunted caribou, fox, wolf, grizzly bear, moose, and fish at various points in his life. (The original biography would have been drawn over a familiar government-issued topographic map.) The other three maps show how multiple biographies were then combined into patterned blobs for all hunters and all species. (Map courtesy of William Rankin/ Penguin Random House LLC.)Figure 2: A two-page spread from the finished atlas showing the seven kinds of animals hunted from the settlements of Igloolik and Hall Beach, in an area about 500 by 300 miles: caribou, polar bear, walrus, whale, fish, seal, and waterfowl. (Because of the large number of individual species recorded in the map biographies, some species were grouped together in the final maps.) The blobs are a strong, even overpowering figure atop an unusually subtle ground. Notice in particular how difficult it is to distinguish land and water areas, since the dark shading extends beyond coastlines even for individual species. This map in fact includes the Northwest Passage—the famous sea route around the tip of North America—but the crucial Fury and Hecla Strait (named after the two British ships that first learned of, but did not navigate, the passage in 1822) is almost entirely obscured. (Map courtesy of William Rankin/ Penguin Random House LLC.)Nothing about the cartography was meant to be subversive—or even controversial. For the cartographers, the only message was that the Inuit hunted a variety of species over large areas. But look again at the finished map in Figure 2. Yes, a foreground is layered over a background in the usual way, but the visual argument is strikingly different from a typical layered map in, say, a census atlas, where the foreground data doesn’t stray beyond crisp pre-existing borders. Here, in contrast, even the basic distinction between land and water is often obscure. The maps’ content is the facts of species and area; the maps’ argument is that Inuit culture is grounded in a substantially different understanding of territory than the one Western cartography was designed to show.As a result, this new atlas shifted the negotiations between the Inuit and the Canadian government decisively. Not only did the maps provide a legal claim to the Inuit-used land, documenting 750,000 square miles—an area the size of Mexico—but also a claim to the sea, showing an additional 325,000 square miles offshore.It took many years for the full implications to play out, but the erosion of the land–water boundary became central to the Inuit vision. At the time, wildlife on land was managed by the regional Northwest Territories government, while offshore marine species were the responsibility of centralized federal agencies. The Inuit used the atlas to win agreement for a new agency with equal responsibility over both. At the same time, the Inuit also improved their position by offering their offshore claims as evidence the Canadian government would use—not just in the 1980s, but even as recently as 2024—to resist foreign encroachment in the Northwest Passage. The final agreement in 1993 granted the Inuit $1.15 billion in cash, title to about 17 percent of the land in the “settlement area,” representation on several new management agencies, a share of all natural-resource revenue, broad hunting and fishing rights, and a promise that the territory of Nunavut would come into being on April 1, 1999.It’s easy to count this project as a success story, but it’s also important to remember that it depended both on the government’s own interest in negotiation and on the willingness of Indigenous peoples, or at least their leadership, to translate their sense of space onto a map, solidifying what had previously been fluid. It also meant abandoning claims to ancestral lands that had not been used in living experience and provoking new boundary disputes with neighboring, and previously amicable, Indigenous groups. These tradeoffs have led some scholars to critique mapping as only “drawing Indigenous peoples into a modern capitalist economy while maintaining the centrality of state power.” But for the Inuit, the alternatives seemed quite a bit worse.With the more recent proliferation of Indigenous mapping initiatives elsewhere—in Latin America, Africa, and Asia—the tradeoffs have been harder to evaluate. Most governments have shown little interest in addressing Indigenous claims, and when bottom-up mapping has been pushed instead by international nonprofits interested in environmental conservation, the downsides of mapping have often come without any of the upsides.Yet it’s not just the attitude of the state that’s been different; it’s also the cartography. In nearly all these other cases, the finished maps have shown none of the territorial inversion of the Inuit atlas. Instead, Indigenous knowledge is either overlaid on an existing base map in perfectly legible form, or it’s used to construct a new base map of a remarkably conventional sort, using the same visual vocabulary as Western maps.Did the Inuit project just show the data so clearly that its deeper implications were immediately apparent? No, not really, since the great irony here is that the cartographers were in fact quite dissatisfied. Follow-up surveys reached the conclusion that the atlas was only “moderately successful” by their usual mapmaking standards.The Inuit atlas was a kind of happy accident—one that doesn’t conform to any of the usual stories about Indigenous mapping, in Canada or elsewhere. The lesson here isn’t that maps should be as Indigenous as possible, or that they should be as orthodox as possible. These maps were neither. My take is simpler: the atlas shows that maps can, in fact, support alternative conceptions of space—and that showing space in a different way is crucial.The possibilities aren’t endless, but they’re broader than we might think. Plotting different sorts of data is a necessary step, but no less important are the relationships between that data and the assumptions of what lies below. For the Inuit, these assumptions were about land, water, and territory. These were in the background both visually and politically, and they were upstaged by an unexpectedly provocative foreground. The layers did not behave as they were meant to, and despite the tradeoffs, they allowed an Indigenous community to fight for their home and their way of life."
}
,
{
"title" : "Malcolm X and Islam: U.S. Islamophobia Didn’t Start with 9/11",
"author" : "Collis Browne",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/malcolm-x-and-islam",
"date" : "2025-11-27 14:58:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/life-malcolm-3.jpg",
"excerpt" : "",
"content" : "Anti-Muslim hate has been deeply engrained and intertwined with anti-Black racism in the United States for well over 60 years, far longer than most of us are taught or are aware.As the EIP team dug into design research for the new magazine format of our first anniversary issue, we revisited 1960s issues of LIFE magazine—and landed on the March 1965 edition, published just after the assassination of Malcolm X.The reporting is staggering in its openness: blatantly anti-Black and anti-Muslim in a way that normalizes white supremacy at its most fundamental level. The anti-Blackness, while horrifying, is not surprising. This was a moment when, despite the formal dismantling of Jim Crow, more than 10,000 “sundown towns” still existed across the country, segregation remained the norm, and racial terror structured daily life.What shocked our team was the nakedness of the anti-Muslim propaganda.This was not yet framed as anti-Arab in the way Western Islamophobia is often framed today. Arab and Middle Eastern people were not present in the narrative at all. Instead, what was being targeted was organized resistance to white supremacy—specifically, the adoption of Islam by Black communities as a source of political power, dignity, and self-determination. From this moment, we can trace a clear ideological line from anti-Muslim sentiment rooted in anti-Black racism in the 1960s to the anti-Arab, anti-MENA, and anti-SWANA racism that saturates Western culture today.The reporting leaned heavily on familiar colonial tropes: the implication of “inter-tribal” violence, the suggestion that resistance to white supremacy is itself a form of reverse racism or inherent aggression, and the detached, almost smug tone surrounding the violent death of a cultural leader.Of course, the Nation of Islam and Elijah Muhammad represent only expressions within an immense and diverse global Muslim world—spanning Morocco, Sudan, the Gulf, Iraq, Pakistan, Indonesia, and far beyond. Yet U.S. cultural and military power has long blurred these distinctions, collapsing complexity into a singular enemy image.It is worth naming this history clearly and connecting the dots: U.S. Islamophobia did not begin with 9/11. It is rooted in a much older racial project—one that has always braided anti-Blackness and anti-Muslim sentiment together in service of white supremacy, at home and abroad."
}
,
{
"title" : "The Billionaire Who Bought the Met Gala: What the Bezoses’ Check Means for Fashion’s Future",
"author" : "Louis Pisano",
"category" : "essays",
"url" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/readings/the-billionaire-who-bought-the-met-gala",
"date" : "2025-11-27 10:41:00 -0500",
"img" : "https://everythingispolitical.com/uploads/Cover_EIP_TBesos_MET_Galajpg.jpg",
"excerpt" : "On the morning of November 17, 2025, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced that Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos would serve as the sole lead sponsors of the 2026 Met Gala and its accompanying Costume Institute exhibition, “Costume Art”. Saint Laurent and Condé Nast were listed as supporting partners. To be clear, this is not a co-sponsorship. It is not “in association with.” It is the first time in the modern history of the gala that the headline slot, previously occupied by Louis Vuitton, TikTok, or a discreet old-money surname, has been handed to a tech billionaire and his wife. The donation amount remains undisclosed, but sources familiar with the negotiations place it comfortably north of seven figures, in line with the checks that helped the event raise $22 million last year.",
"content" : "On the morning of November 17, 2025, the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced that Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez Bezos would serve as the sole lead sponsors of the 2026 Met Gala and its accompanying Costume Institute exhibition, “Costume Art”. Saint Laurent and Condé Nast were listed as supporting partners. To be clear, this is not a co-sponsorship. It is not “in association with.” It is the first time in the modern history of the gala that the headline slot, previously occupied by Louis Vuitton, TikTok, or a discreet old-money surname, has been handed to a tech billionaire and his wife. The donation amount remains undisclosed, but sources familiar with the negotiations place it comfortably north of seven figures, in line with the checks that helped the event raise $22 million last year.Within hours of the announcement, the Met’s Instagram post was overrun with comments proclaiming the gala “dead.” On TikTok and X, users paired declarations of late-stage capitalism with memes of the museum staircase wrapped in Amazon boxes. Not that this was unexpected. Anyone paying attention could see it coming for over a decade.When billionaires like Bezos, whose Amazon warehouses reported injury rates nearly double the industry average in 2024 and whose fashion supply chain has been linked to forced labor and poverty wages globally, acquire influence over prestigious institutions like the Met Museum through sponsorships, it risks commodifying fashion as a tool for not only personal but corporate image-laundering. To put it simply: who’s going to bite the hand that feeds them? Designers, editors, and curators will have little choice but to turn a blind eye to keep the money flowing and the lights on.Back in 2012, Amazon co-chaired the “Schiaparelli and Prada” gala, and honorary chair Jeff Bezos showed up in a perfectly respectable tux with then-wife MacKenzie Scott by his side and an Anna Wintour-advised pocket square. After his divorce from Scott in 2019, Bezos made a solo appearance at the Met Gala, signaling that he was becoming a familiar presence in fashion circles on his own. Of course, by that point, he already had Lauren Sánchez. Fast forward to 2020: print advertising was crumbling, and Anna Wintour co-signed The Drop, a set of limited CFDA collections sold exclusively on Amazon, giving the company a veneer of fashion credibility. By 2024, Sánchez made her Met debut in a mirrored Oscar de la Renta gown personally approved by Wintour, signaling that the Bezos orbit was now squarely inside the fashion world.Then, the political world started to catch up, as it always does. In January 2025, Sánchez and Bezos sat three rows behind President-elect Donald Trump at the inauguration. Amazon wrote a one-million-dollar check to Trump’s inaugural fund, and Bezos, once mocked by Trump as “Jeff Bozo,” publicly congratulated Trump on an “extraordinary political comeback.” By June 2025, Bezos and Sánchez became cultural and political mainstays: Sánchez married Bezos in Venice, wearing a Dolce & Gabbana gown Wintour had helped select. This landed Sánchez the digital cover of American Vogue almost immediately afterward. Wintour quietly handed day-to-day control of the magazine to Chloe Malle but kept the Met Gala, the global title, and her Condé Nast equity stake, cementing a new era of fashion power where money, influence, and optics are inseparable.Underneath all of it, the quiet hum of Amazon’s fashion machine continued to whirr. By 2024, the company already controlled 16.2 percent of every dollar Americans spent on clothing, footwear, and accessories—more than Walmart, Target, Macy’s, and Nordstrom combined. That same year, it generated $34.7 billion in U.S. apparel and footwear revenue that year, with the women’s category alone on pace to top $40 billion. No legacy house has ever had that volume of real-time data on what people actually try on, keep, or return in shame. Amazon can react in weeks rather than seasons, reordering winning pieces, tweaking existing ones, and killing unpopular options before they’re even produced at scale.Wintour did more than simply observe this shift; she engineered a soft landing by bringing Amazon in when it was still somewhat uncool and seen mostly as a discount retailer, lending it credibility when it needed legitimacy, and spending the last two years turning Sánchez from tabloid footnote to Vogue cover star. The Condé Nast sale rumors that began circulating in July 2025, complete with talk of Wintour cashing out her equity and Sánchez taking a creative role, have been denied by every official mouthpiece. But they have also refused to die, because the timeline is simply too tidy.The clearest preview of what billionaire ownership can do to a cultural institution remains Bezos’ other pet project, The Washington Post. Bezos bought it for $250 million in 2013, saved it from bankruptcy, and built it into a profitable digital operation with 2.5 million subscribers. Then, in October 2024, he personally blocked a planned editorial endorsement of Kamala Harris. More than 250,000 subscribers canceled in the following days. By February 2025, the opinion section was restructured around “personal liberties and free markets,” triggering another exodus and the resignation of editorial page editor David Shipley. Former executive editor Marty Baron called it “craven.” The timing, just months after Bezos began warming to the incoming Trump administration, was not lost on anyone. The story didn’t stop there: in the last few days, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance revealed he had texted Bezos suggesting the hiring of a right-leaning Breitbart journalist, Matthew Boyle, to run the Post’s political coverage. This is a clear signal of how staffing decisions at a storied paper now sit within the same power matrix that funds the Met Gala and shapes culture, media, and politics alike. It’s a tangled, strategic web—all of Bezos’ making.It’s curious that, in the same 30-day window that the Trump DOJ expanded its antitrust inquiry into Amazon, specifically how its algorithms favor its own products over third-party sellers, including many fashion brands, the MET, a city-owned museum, handed the keys of its marquee event to the man whose company now wields outsized influence over designers’ fortunes and faces regulatory scrutiny from the administration he helped reinstall. This is not sponsorship; it’s leverage. Wintour once froze Melania Trump out of Vogue because she could afford to.But she cannot freeze out Sánchez or Bezos. Nor does she want to.So on the first Monday in May, the museum doors will open as they always do for the Met Gala. The carpet will still be red (or whatever color the theme demands). The photographs of celebrities posing in their interpretations of “Costume Art” will still break the internet. Andrew Bolton’s exhibition, roughly 200 objects tracing the dressed body across five millennia, displayed in the newly renamed Condé Nast Galleries, will still be brilliant. But the biggest check will come from the couple who already control 16 percent of America’s clothing spend, who own The Washington Post, and who sat three rows behind Trump at the inauguration. Everything else, guest list tweaks, livestream deals, shoppable moments, will flow from that single source of money and power. That is who now has the final word on the most influential night in American fashion."
}
]
}