#:3 swindle supremacy | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

minervarosewilliams · 4 years

Text

January 6th Asteroids ~ 1 pm 2021 Coup

Jan6 Swindle 13 Sagittarius 39 conjunct Jan6 Fanatica 13 Sagittarius 57 Jan6 Whitehouse 14 Sagittarius 21 Jan6 Venus 27 Sagittarius 37 conjunct Jan6 Reich 28 Sagittarius 15 <Encouraging white supremacy.> Jan6 Pax 25 Cancer 17 conjunct Jan6 Split 28 Cancer 35 opposition Jan6 Pluto 24 Capricorn 38 <Peace vs transformation.> Jan6 Moonimtroll 3 Taurus 11 conjunct Yeti 3 Taurus 54 opposition Jan6 Sado 2 Scorpio 52 Jan6 Rhadamanthus 3 Scorpio 43 <Trolls opposing justice. This describes the Trump rally inciting insurrection. Yeti is one of Trump’s nicknames.> Jan6 Paine 25 Virgo 26 conjunct Jan6 Lie 26 Virgo 46 Jan6 Truth 22 Aries 12 opposition Jan6 Moon 21 Libra 13 T-square Jan6 House 22 Cancer 01 Jan6 Chiron 5 Aries 9 Jan6 Bowman 6 Cancer 19 Jan6 BAM 4 Libra 34 Jan6 Bomben 6 Capricorn 7 <This forms a grand square, the most energetic aspect. Most of these are lesser violent asteroids; we did have 2 bombs but no casualties from them. Chiron is the wounded healer, so we will try to repair this,].> Jan6 United States 26 Aquarius 16 conjunct Jan6 Flammeus 28 Aquarius 51 Jan6 TL66 19 Gemini 33 conjunct Jan6 North Node 19 Gemini 39 <This one is bad. TL66 is a serious disaster asteroid, and it is very slow. The Nodal axis is karmic, and it is relatively slow, with a perodicity of about 19 years. On the plus side, apparently we’re supposed to be destructive, and we have that going on in spades.> <But then we have this.> Trump Dejanira 19 Gemini 32 <This is where he is vulnerable and has no defense.> Jan6 Skepticus 20 Libra 32 conjunct Jan6 Guardi 20 Libra 32

,There have been suspicion of police cooperating with the rioters.>

Jan6 Demokritos 2 Sagittarius 14 conjunct Jan6 NOT 2 Sagittarius 34

Jan6 Pluto 24 Capricorn 23 conjunct Jan6 Hylonome 24 Capricorn 23

1 note · View note

jonobailey-coms-for-makers · 4 years

Text

Week 7

Exercise 1

Lots of signatures

Both Maori and English

Multiple versions across multiple different sheets

Some signatures have a symbol used instead

Looks folded, stained, torn, very damaged

Does this show the extent and effort taken to transport it across country

Two versions, Maori and English, only version without Maori translation is Waikato-Manakau

Yet was signed by Maori chiefs, maybe they could speak and/or read English

Materials used ink and papyrus? Or paper?

Exercise 2

Maori were told by signing the they would have protection from both the Pakeha settlers and the possible French colonisation of New Zealand. It also was supposed to control the lawless actions of Pakeha settlers by enforcing the laws of the king upon them.

The poor translation and lack of Maori culture and Mana is evident throughout translation. Yes some words can be switched in translation but the overall meaning of the texts MUST be the same across cultures. In Te Triti Sovereignty is switched with Governorship in the Te Reo translation. In Maori culture Governorship meant they would receive a governor to impose the laws of the Crown onto their subjects but instead it was meant to be a cease of all power to the Crown.

Another sneaky detail is the fact the Maori must offer their land to the Crown before another private buyer, and at this point in time the Crown was buying land cheap and on selling for profit. Essentially the Maori were swindled out of their land and may have resulted in being removed, basically losing all authority of the land and resources. Another result of poor translation.

Exercise 3

In this time period British culture very much dismissed woman to having the right to any sort of power and/or respect. Maori culture power and respect is earnt by an individual no matter their gender, hence Wahine being able to sign the treaty and leave their mark in history. Even though they left their mark/moko on the treaty the idea of them signing would have been diminished by the British counterparts. Exercise 4

As makers, can we assume to be working in a negotiated cultural space? Is this notion the same for everyone?

Notes from discussion

Inclusion of integrating cultures

Motifs that relate to the culture

Negotiated??

Not everyone will be hard

Take into account what or who is there

Others are there, who are they

Stretch ideas to become more inclusive

World around us isn’t homologous

Independent study

Ramifications

The treaty protects mana, tino rangatiratanga, and tikanga

It was to take responsibility for the Queens subjects lawless nature and behavior

Maori throughout North Island signed away their control and power to the Queen when signing the treaty - The English version not Maori

English document stated cease of sovereignty

Maori never saw the English translation

Maori wanted a constitution done for the country to withhold what was promised

Working party wanting to draft a constitution based on the Te Triti o Waitangi and tikanga

130 meanings of the documents (more than the treaty) being debated by family, communities, and their country

Some don’t resonant with the written information

Meanings of the documents (written) don’t match with the oral meanings/translation

Hidden Wishes-wrongly assumed the world was theirs

Right of discovery

British (European)_see themselves as superior beings above all indigenous races

Today Maori are continued to be viewed under an inferior lens

Myths

Pakeha supremacy

Maori are inferior

Maori ceded sovereignty to the Queen

Maori benefited from British colonisation

No use for their land, water, seas, and taonga

Pakeha know whats best for Maori

These myths were taught in schools for the post 140 years

Feeling of deceitfulness to Pakeha

Pakeha made laws to allow their actions

Maori became marginalised, deprived, and oppressed-lost everything to the crown

Maori obtained internalised racism leading them to feel inferior and powerless to their oppressors (Pakeha)

Pakeha have a sense of guilt

Selective amnesia - Forgetting chunks of history, when suited, and a form of denial

Power/control of behavior

Denial on both parts, Pakeha and Maori, Maori and change

Debate continues on in present day-more like an argument

Want for ways to change and a new updated fairer document to be implemented

Maori just want what was promised and their sovereignty restored with mana

“Contributed To New Zealand development”

Maori are shut out from ever making any claims

Tribunal has become another arm of the government

Country/Culture that lashes out on Maori success and tries to exploit/undermine whenever possible

Mixed involvement is key to success-proves doubters wrong

Misinformed or choose to forget the shameful truth and history of their ancestors, built on myths

Change the rules to create clear alignment with cultural beliefs and law

Greater and better founded understanding of history and truth

0 notes

allofbeercom · 6 years

Text

Trump’s America

(CNN)Almost everyone thought he would lose. Clinton did. Her vaunted political operatives did. The pollsters did. The #NeverTrump Republicans did. For all his bluster and bold predictions of victory, Trump himself had been worrying all day. He kept pressing aides for information, but they were worried, too. Even his internal models showed him falling short of the 270 electoral votes needed to win.

Editor’s Note: This is an excerpt from CNN’s book, “Unprecedented.” Order your copy today at cnn.com/book and explore CNN’s coverage of “A race like no other” at cnn.com/unprecedented

But as the night went on, strange and unexpected numbers flashed across the television screens of America. Early returns put Trump ahead by 3 points in Florida, 10 in Ohio and North Carolina. Virginia was not supposed to be competitive, but Trump had an early lead there, too.

“There isn’t panic,” a Clinton aide said around 8 p.m. Then it was 9, and 10, and the numbers held in Florida and Ohio, and now Trump was leading in Michigan and Wisconsin. Could he crack the Democrats’ so-called Blue Wall in the industrial Midwest? Clinton’s aides doubted it. They thought he’d missed his chance in Michigan by not campaigning much there until the end. Clinton was so confident about Wisconsin that she never campaigned there at all. She was not so sure about Pennsylvania, which is why she’d hit Philadelphia three times in three days and visited Pittsburgh the previous morning. But now, even in Pennsylvania, her lead narrowed as the night went on. Five points, 4, 3. Something was happening out there, a seismic disruption whose foreshocks nearly all the experts had ignored. By 10:04 p.m., Dow futures had plunged by nearly 500 points. And the wildest campaign in modern history appeared to have one more astonishing twist.

As it turned out, the experts’ combined wisdom was no match for that of Dave Calabro, also known as Jersey Dave, a 57-year-old South Philadelphian and Trump supporter who thought America had lost its way. He’d acquired his nickname by selling Eagles jerseys in sports bars to provide for his family. He did not always drink beer, but when he did, he usually drank Coors Light. He yelled BLUE LIVES MATTER to cops on Broad Street. He used to love Bruce Springsteen, but now he thought the Boss had disgraced himself by supporting Clinton. Jersey Dave Calabro said it that summer, and kept saying it until Election Day: Trump would carry Pennsylvania, which no Republican had done since 1988, and he would be the next American president.

“The guy never loses,” Calabro said.

There were two Americas in 2016. One had been advancing for a long time. One had been retreating. And on November 8, Trump and his army of Jersey Dave Calabros found a way to reverse the trend.

The two Americas were nearly a century in the making. They resulted from women’s suffrage, the civil rights movement, the women’s rights movement, the gay rights movement and a Hispanic population that increased by roughly 50 million in the last fifty years. These changes had two things in common: They gave power to those who previously had little or none. And they diminished the supremacy of straight white men.

Clinton’s America was a coalition of these historically disadvantaged groups, along with their white male allies. Year by year, it seemed to align more closely with large corporations and the global elite. It was urban, ascendant, seemingly unstoppable.

Its inhabitants saw the last hundred years as a good start, an unfinished march of societal progress. Yes, the nation had same-sex marriage, an African-American president and a number of female chief executives, but this America still felt itself chafing against systemic inequality. Did racism, sexism and homophobia still exist? Of course they did. Clinton’s America wanted them eradicated.

Trump’s America drew in some women and minorities. But much of its energy came from white male grievance. Factories had been closing for decades. Many manufacturing jobs had moved overseas or given way to automation. As wages stagnated, more and more blue-collar men felt themselves working hard and going nowhere. They felt abandoned by the new information economy, swindled by Washington politicians, stifled by the new cultural orthodoxy. Certain men of Trump’s America were thrilled when he said, “Frankly, if Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5 percent of the vote.” These men were tired of being blamed for the sins of their fathers, sick of hearing the phrase white guy thrown around like an insult. Wasn’t that racism, too? Couldn’t there be sexism against men? They felt as if the people of Clinton’s America had overtaken them somehow, probably by cheating.

Explore more: Unprecedented — Two Angry Men and Their Disenchanted Armies

“I know I’m the projection for many of those wounded men,” Clinton once said, as quoted in “Hillary’s Choice,” a 1999 book by Gail Sheehy. “I’m the boss they never wanted to have. I’m the wife they neverthe wife who went back to school and got an extra degree and a job as good as theirs….It’s not me, personally, they hateit’s the changes I represent.”

A year before Clinton’s campaign officially began, two allies were emailing about strategy. “In fact, I think running on her gender would be the SAME mistake as 2008, ie having a message at odds with what voters ultimately want,” Robby Mook, her eventual campaign manager, wrote in a message later hacked and released by WikiLeaks. “She ran on experience when voters wanted change….It’s also risky because injecting gender makes her candidacy about HER and not the voters and making their lives better.”

But Clinton’s America wanted to rally behind the woman who could bring societal progress to its next logical step. If she won, they would all win, at least symbolically, and so the campaign adopted the slogan I’m With Her. On the day she testified before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October 2015, online appeals using this slogan helped her raise $133,000 in a single hour.

“I don’t want you to vote for me because I’m a woman; I want you to vote for me on the merits,” she said that year. “But one of my merits is that I’m a woman.”

Early in 2016, her campaign chairman, John Podesta, received an email that was later released by WikiLeaks. “I’m a dinosaur to the Democratic Party…white, southern, veteran, male senior,” wrote Dana Folsom of Augusta, Georgia. “…I would like to have my ilk shown a tiny bit of respect by the leaders of the Hillary campaign.”

“You’ve earned that respect and we’ll try to show it,” Podesta replied.

Was Clinton’s America big enough for men like Dana Folsom? He did vote for her in the Georgia primary. She added other slogans, such as Fighting for Us and Stronger Together. Still, many blue-collar men were suspicious. Fighting for Us sounded like fighting for the people who were not them, rallying those people against them, and Stronger Together still evoked the progressive union against the way things used to be.

“I’m with you,” Trump said, and they liked that more than I’m With Her. Her aides marveled at the reams of negative stories about Trump that had no effect. Decorated generals and establishment Republicans joined forces with Clinton to tell the men of Trump’s America they were making a huge mistake. But the men ignored the message, because they distrusted the messengers, and because, like Trump, they hated being told no. These rugged individualists who felt their country being stolen were not about to “listen to reason” from those they suspected of committing the theft. No, you can’t elect someone like Trump? Their campaign slogan might as well have been Yes I Can.

You can’t vote for a man who insults women and immigrants and Muslims and people with disabilities.

Yes I can.

You can’t vote for a man who boasts about sexually assaulting women.

Yes I can.

You can’t give the nuclear codes to a man who might blow up the world because someone looked at him sideways.

Yes I

* * *

JUST WATCHED

Unprecedented Election 2016 Book, In Stores Dec 6th

Replay