#Colonial Militia

[workersolidarity]

🇮🇱 🚨

ISRAELI SETTLERS STORM UNRWA HEADQUARTERS IN OCCUPIED AL-QUDS

📹 Scenes of Israeli colonial settler militias storming the UNRWA headquarters today in the Shiekh Jarrah neighborhood of occupied Al-Quds (Jerusalem).

Meanwhile, UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine, reported today that the humanitarian organization has been subjected to 368 attacks by the Israeli occupation army, while at least 429 displaced Palestinian civilians have been killed while seeking shelter in the agency's buildings since the start of the war.

#source

#videosource

@WorkerSolidarityNews

[postcard-from-the-past]

Indochinese colonial militia in Laos

French vintage postcard

[stymshots]

Allies of circumstance.

[apas-95]

When someone from europe or a peripheral capitalist state does the whole 'oh police violence and repression aren't a problem here that's just a USA thing' song and dance, it's obviously bullshit - the oppositional nature between the enforcers of the ruling class and the classes they rule over is fairly fundamental to the existence of any state - but it would be a lot easier to countermand if usamericans weren't so utterly provincial.

The character of the bourgeois police in, for example, Kazakhstan, is genuinely different than that of the US police, and cannot be neatly understood through just seeing it as a variation on the latter. A more broad, theoretical understanding of policing in general applies to both, but an empiricist understanding of a federal security apparatus descended from British-imperial slave patrols just plainly will not transfer to a unitary state's police force made to replace a workers' militia.

This applies to everything, really - the racial and ethnic dynamics of a given place outside the USA are going to be fundamentally and qualitatively different than those of the USA, and the refusal, of usamericans who have learned, empirically, about the nature of anglo settler-colonial white supremacy, to then develop a deeper and broader theoretical understanding of how systems of racial and ethnic oppression are developed - rather than saying 'its crazy that serbs and croats could hate each other when they're both White, shrimp racism lol' and the like - makes it more difficult, not less, to meaningfully oppose it when someone says 'racism isn't a problem in my country, just the USA', especially when the only response given is regarding supposed oppression of racial categories that may well not exist in that context.

This is, incidentally, why the whole 'I don't need theory, I have lived experience' tripe is wholly insufficient for the real world. You do not have enough experience, and you are going to encounter novel scenarios where mindlessly applying learned dynamics by rote will lead to entirely confident wrong answers. It's not good enough. The world is a lot bigger than you.

[akajustmerry]

As a second generation Lebanese Australian from a Lebanese family who's always been pro-Palestine, it's so important to view the occupation's drone bombing of Beirut in context. 1) Zionist forces have been bombing the south for over 70 days with missiles and illegal white phosphorus bombs. 2) The 100s of 1000s od Palestinians in Lebanon are heavily discriminated against by the Lebanese government. Palestinian refugees who have lived in Lebanon for generations are denied rights to own property, work, healthcare, and education. 3) This is a reality that co-exists with the Zionist occupation historically treating Lebanon as an "enemy state", with the occupation invading, occupying, and massacring people in Lebanese territories as early as 1949 and as recent as 2006. 4) There is an ultra-right Christian nationalist sect in Lebanon who have historically supported the Zionist occupation, going so far as to form a small militia to assist the occupation in the Shatila and Sabra refugee massacres in which over 3,000 Palestinian and Lebanese people were slaughtered. 5) The Zionist occupation has been leveraging Lebanon's dire economic crisis to take more control over Lebanon's oil and gas fields. There is a huge history behind the occupation's drone strike and assassinations in Beirut today. A history that shows how the Zionist entity's boot on the necks of the surrounding governments has only led to the perpetration of more violence against Palestinians in these nations, as well as citizens of those nations. This is what settler colonial entities do. It's all they can do: division and violence. And when the coloniser can't do the violence themselves, they engineer conditions for others to do it for them under threat of violence. A ceasefire is not enough. The Zionist occupation of Palestine and the Levant must end.

[esyra]

Killing 1300+ Jews in barbaric ways does not make you the good guys. Israel retaliating is Hamas’ fault. Hamas surrendering would mean peace. Israel surrendering would have more dead Jews. But i guess that’s the end goal.

No, we're always the barbaric terrorists. Israel is the good guy for killing 9,000+ Gazans the past 25 days, and trapping 1,000+ under the rubble which will definitely turn out dead if they ever get the proper equipment to lift it off them. Israel is the good guy for killing Shireen Abu Akleh. Israel is the good guy for killing Ahmed Erekat. Israel is the good guy for killing Nadim Nuwarah and Mohammed Salameh. Israel is the good guy for opening fire on 2,400 protesters and killing 52. Israel is the good guy for holding over 1,000 Palestinians as "administrative detainees," meaning they are held indefinitely without charges.

In fact, Israel has been the good guy ever since they got the British to help them colonize Palestine and get rid of the Arabs, as they admitted to wanting it themselves. After all, as Winston Churchill said himself, the colonization of Palestine was righteous because as the Red Indians of America, and the black people of Australia, "a stronger race, a higher grade race, or, at any rate, a more worldly-wise race, to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

Palestinians, be it on Gaza or the West Bank, can never retaliate or defend themselves. We're to either die and be violated quietly or we are terrorists which will be gleefully eradicated with the help of every colony-based State in the world. Otherwise, we'll disturb the comfortable privilege your racism and religious intolerance ensures.

When Hamas didn't existed the occupation began and the British violently suppressed anyone who opposed. When Hamas didn't exist the Nakba happened. When Hamas didn't exist the Deir Yassin massacre happened. But, you know, that one's fine because it happened after Israel had made Palestine agree to a peace pact, and they would never act unfairly so the brutal murder of over 100 Palestinians is obviously being misunderstood. Hamas doesn't operate in the West Bank, but they're still expelled from their homes, brutalized and murdered. Since October 7, West Bank had 115 killed, more than 2,000 injured and nearly 1,000 others forcibly displaced from their homes because of violence and intimidation by Israeli forces and settlers. They'll bomb mosques with exit points created to save people from settlers' violence, then claim they were used for terrorism. Proof? They don't need it. They'll bomb first then ask questions later.

Do people who blindly defend Israel do anything other than victimize yourselves? Do you even read any actual Israeli news that said the IDF "shell[ed] houses on their occupants," because they're too incompetent to do anything other than bombing everything? Do you ever wonder why the people Israel swears were burned and beheaded always came from reports from houses absolutely destroyed by what could only be shelling? Do you ever hear testimonies from survivors of the massacre saying IDF shoot at their own civilians? Do you ever read about past al-Qassam attacks and noticed they've never had mass casualties because IDF never responded like this? Do you even know what al-Qassam is or do you live to regurgitate whatever you're fed and being spoon-fed your information?

If Hamas' militia surrenders, Gaza will be wiped out and Gazans — those who are not murdered — will be exiled into Egypt's Sinai. That's the end goal since 1948, and that's what you're defending. But who cares? Arab blood is cheaper and racism is always fashionable.

[fuckyeahisawthat]

There are so many places in the Villeneuve Dune adaptations where he just...takes all the narrative pieces that Frank Herbert laid out and subtly rearranges them into something that tells the story better--that creates dramatic tension where you need it, communicates the themes and message of the book more clearly, or corrects something in the text that contradicts or undermines what Herbert said he was trying to say.

The fedaykin are probably my favorite example of this. I just re-read a little part of the book and got smacked in the face with how different they are.

(under the cut for book spoilers and length)

The fedaykin in the book are Paul's personal followers, sort of his personal guard. They show up after his legend has already started growing (the word doesn't appear in the book until chapter 40) and they are people who have specifically dedicated themselves to fighting for him, and right from the moment they're introduced there is a kind of implied fanaticism to their militancy that's a bit uncomfortable to read. They're the most ardent believers in Paul's messianic status and willing to die for him. (They are also, as far as you can tell from the text, all men.)

In the book, as far as I can remember (I could be forgetting some small detail but I don't think so) there is no mention of armed resistance to colonialism on Arrakis before Paul shows up. As far as we know, he created it. ETA: Okay I actually went back and checked on this and while we hear about the Fremen being "a thorn in the side" of the Harkonnens and we know that they are good fighters, we don't see anything other than possibly one bit of industrial sabotage. The book is very clear that the organized military force we see in the second half was armed and trained by Paul. This is exacerbated by the two-year time jump in the book, which means we never see how Paul goes from being a newly deposed ex-colonial overlord running for his life to someone who has his own private militia of people ready to give their lives for him.

The movie completely flips all these dynamics on their head in ways that add up to a radical change in meaning.

The fedaykin in the movie are an already-existing guerrilla resistance movement on Arrakis that formed long before Paul showed up. Literally the first thing we learn about the Fremen, less that two minutes into the first movie, is that they are fighting back against the colonization and exploitation of their home and have been for decades.

The movie fedaykin also start out being the most skeptical of the prophecy about Paul, which is a great choice from both a political and a character standpoint. Of course they're skeptical. If you're part of a small guerrilla force repeatedly going up against a much bigger and stronger imperial army...you have to believe in your own agency. You have to believe that it is possible to win, and that this tiny little chip in the armor of a giant terrifying military machine that you are making right now will make a difference in the end. These are the people who are directly on the front lines of resisting oppression. They are doing it with their own sweat, blood and ingenuity, and they are not about to wait around for some messiah who may never come.

From a character standpoint, this is really the best possible environment you could put Paul Atreides in if you want to keep him humble. He doesn't get any automatic respect handed to him due to title or birthright or religious belief. He has to prove himself--not as any kind of savior but as a good fighter and a reliable member of a collective political project. And he does. This is an environment that really draws out his best qualities. He's a skilled fighter; he's brave (sometimes recklessly so); he's intensely loyal to and protective of people he cares about. He is not too proud to learn from others and work hard in an egalitarian environment where he gets no special treatment or extra glory. The longer he spends with the fedaykin the more his allegiance shifts from Atreides to Fremen, and the more skeptical he himself becomes about the prophecy. This sets up the conflict with Jessica, which comes to a head before she leaves for the south. And his political sincerity--that he genuinely comes to believe that these people deserve liberation from all colonial forces and his only role should be to help where he can--is what makes the tragedy work. Because in the end we know he will betray all these values and become the exact thing he said he didn't want to be.

There's another layer of meaning to all this that I don't know if the filmmakers were even aware of. ETA: rescinding my doubt cause based on some of Villeneuve's other projects I'm pretty sure he could work it out. Given the time period (1960s) and Herbert's propensity for using Arabic or Arabic-inspired words for aspects of Fremen culture, it seems very likely that the made-up word fedaykin was taken from fedayeen, a real Arabic word that was frequently used untranslated in American news media at the time, usually to refer to Palestinian armed resistance groups.

Fedayeen is usually translated into English as fighter, guerrilla, militant or something similar. The translation of fedaykin that Herbert provides in Dune is "death commando"...which is a whole bucket of yikes in my opinion, but it's not entirely absurd if we're assuming that this fake word and the real word fedayeen function in the same way. A more literal translation of fedayeen is "self-sacrificer," as in willing, intentional self-sacrifice for a political cause, up to and including sacrificing your life.

If you apply this logic to Dune, it means that Villeneuve has actually shifted the meaning of this word in-universe, from fighters who are willing to sacrifice themselves for Paul to fighters who are willing to sacrifice themselves for their people. And the fedaykin are no longer a group created for Paul but a group that Paul counts himself as part of, one member among equals. Which is just WILDLY different from what's in the book. And so much better in my opinion.

[i-am-aprl]

In 1948, as Zionist militias displaced 750,000 Palestinians from their homes during the Nakba that created the Israeli state, South Africa's Nationalist Party formally instituted a program of apartheid. The two communities--Black South Africans and Palestinians--have a long history of solidarity informed by their shared experiences of settler colonialism and apartheid. The latest chapter unfolded today, as South Africa argued before the International Court of Justice that Israel is committing acts of genocide against Palestinians.

"We know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians." -Nelson Mandela, 1997

[psychotrenny]

It’s fucking insane to me how normal Yankee Liberals are about Hawaii. As in like the way they just treat it as an unremarkable fact that their nation controls the island. Like the annexation of Hawaii wasn’t just any old example of Settler-Colonialism, the subjugation of a decentralised non-urbanised people that could be just dismissed as mere “tribes” or what have you. Not to say that such forms of “typical” Settler Colonialism are any less abhorrent or disgusting, just easier to justify from a Liberal point of view. Easier to claim that they weren’t *really* using the land properly or that they were an hopelessly and eternally backwards who only really benefitted from their conquest or that they were doomed and dying anyway and their fate was a mere tragic inevitability not worth dwelling on or… Point is all these arguments are all wrong and stupid and cruel but they can serve well enough to downplay or justify such atrocities in the eyes of Imperial Core Liberals.

But like with Hawaii you don’t have that. The Kingdom of Hawai’i was a sovereign state that was internationally recognised as such by the Great Powers of Europe even at the very height of Western Imperialism. Literacy rates were high and compulsory education was introduced in 1841 (pre-dating the US by 77 years), healthcare was given to all Hawai’ian subjects free of charge, Christianity was dominant (so even the most ardent Imperialist couldn’t claim that the people were in the thrall of some “barbaric superstition” that necessitated the “civilising influence” of empire) and it had a well-developed Capitalist economy dominated by Sugar production.  Like even if we take the Western model of statehood as the be all end all of what separates the civilised from the savage (to be clear hear you really fucking shouldn’t, but many people do so for a second that’s the frame of reference we’ll employ) then Hawai’i was very much unambiguously the former.  But that didn’t stop the US from shamelessly interfering it’s politics Indeed those aformentioned markers of Western-Style “civilisation” and “development” came with the price of allow US missionaries and investors to settler in the islands and become very wealthy and influential. For decades the US used the threat of force to influence the policy decisions of the kingdom, going as far as to regularly send warships in a classic display of “gunboat diplomacy”. In 1887 a US settler militia called the First Honolulu Rifles staged a coup where they forced Kalākaua to accept a new Constitution that heavily favoured the interests of USamerican settlers who had grown very wealthy through their investment in sugar production on the island.  It stripped the Monarchy of much of its power and introducing requirements for voting that heavily favoured US settlers; re-introducing wealth/property requirements that were now higher than even, allowing resident aliens to vote and just outright banning any Asian immigrants from voting (which at that point had as much to do with plain racial hatred as it did to any acting threat they might have posed). This wasn’t enough for the Yanks and 6 years later a group of 13 US settlers known as the “Committee of Safety” outright overthrew the newly crowned Queen Liliʻuokalani when she refused to co-operate. It existed briefly as an “Independent” USamerican dominated republic before the US government decided to official annex it in 1898 (similar to what you saw with Texas or California).

While incredibly controversial at the time due to both strategic concerns with the annexation of ultramarine territories and some level of outrage at the shameless take-over of a sovereign nation (hence the time gap between the coup and the actual annexation), nowadays Yanks enjoy their control over the island without the slightest care in the world. They even turned it into a tourist destination, a heavily romanticised one that not only receives many millions of visitors every year but is constantly mentioned in the popular culture the US then proceeds to export all over the world, literally revelling in their land that is by literally any definition (even the most nakedly pro-imperialist) stolen. The land itself is severely exploited to the point of significant ecological damage, the indigenous peoples too are exploited as many of them live in poverty while US investors grow wealthy from their land and labour. Even their very culture is stolen and monetised, the most marketable parts bastardised into cheap kitsch and the rest of it left to rot, only kept alive through over a century of continued resistance from the indigenous peoples. It’s a very common story of course, but I think it stands out with how utterly ghoulish it is even under the most Liberal of consistently applied worldviews. It would be like if in say 2007 someone set up Disneyland in Bagdad. And yet by the vast majority of the US (and by extension the vassals states whose view of the situation is filtered through the lens of US media and propaganda) it isn’t seen that way. Hawaii is just the 50th state, the only state outside North America and in the tropics (hahaha ain’t that a neat little fact. Geography is so fun J), an island paradise perfect to visit with the whole family and yet still as American as Apple Pie. Even many self-described “progressives” talk about it in this way, at most mentioning the plight of the indigenous Hawaiians with minimal though as to how this situation came about. Like while the story of Hawaii is far from unique; even in terms of the US doing colonialism to Westernised peoples you examples such as the ethnic cleansing of the Five Civilised Tribes from the Eastern USA, it still stands out to me with the sheer level of international recognition and Western-style development that the Kingdom of Hawai’i possessed. Like it’s just such an obvious example of the naked greed at the heart of the USamerican empire, and how utterly bullshit talk of a “civilising mission” and “spreading democracy” is. No matter what they may claim, no matter what excuses they may trot out, Imperialist rapacity has no limits.

[apas-95]

Why are liberals constantly likening themselves to fascists, constantly creating hypothetical scenarios to voice their support for Hitler? Don't they care how they sound?

No, they dont.

Fundamentally, there is an absolute limit to any sort of referential argument - of saying 'the zionist settler-occupation of Palestine is like the rhodesian settler-occupation of Zimbabwe', or 'the logic that justifies this type of transmisogynistic statement is the same logic that justifies this type of racist statement', or, yes, 'you are literally comparing yourself to Hitler'. That limit is precisely in the fact that you are relying on the argument against the referent to already have been made for you.

Plenty of people were and are fine with the colonial occupation carried out by Cecil Rhodes - including the founders of the israeli occupation state. Plenty of people still wholeheartedly agree with racist logic and hold racist views. These are not problems that are 'solved', squared away in the records of history to be referred back to - it was the prevailing opinion among liberals in the 1920s and 1930s that Hitler and the Nazis were basically great guys, opposing the authoritarian menace of the communists. It should not be surprising that the liberals who - right this moment! - send donations to neonazi militias in the Ukraine, to buy more sonnenrand patches, are fine with comparing themselves to Hitler!

Referential arguments are not enough. An actual, substantive argument, built of Marxist theory, is what is required in all cases, and simply hoping one has already been provided cannot do. You are watching, in real time, as the liberal position explicitly reverts to 'fascism is an acceptable alternative', and you can do nothing but guffaw and say 'but that's fascism!' as if they don't know. It cannot do. Study, discuss, and come to a proper understanding of the matter. Lives depend on it.

[2enba2luka]

People need to understand that Israel is not a sovereign state, for the same reason that the 13 colonies were not sovereign states: it is a settler colony of an imperialist power. The prime minister of Israel isn't any more of a State leader than the hereditary captain of Pernambuco was during early colonial Brazil. The IOF isn't any more of an independent military force than settler militias in the western US during the 19th century. Israel is the last¹ settler-colonial frontier of the modern world, and the metropole is doing everything it can to support it. Pretending that the metropole (the US and its allies) are not completely responsible for every Israeli war crime is like pretending that Hitler wasn't responsible for the Holocaust.

[vouseofwolves]

Israel bombed a cancer hospital today. one of many other hospitals and places of shelter they have bombed not only since the 7th of October but over the years. and yet some of you still dare to take a neutral stance or even still support Israel. Israeli news call over 8000 civilians killed as 'terrorists we eliminated' and you still dare to ask people to condemn Hamas and "look at both sides" there is only one thing any kind of resistance is called and its terrorists. the oppressor is the oppressed and the resistance (the only militia that Palestine has btw, while Israel posseses nuclear weapons and army funded by the U.S) are terrorists. those who fight for freedom and human rights of their people after being colonised 75 years ago (yes; Israel is a colonial state that has been there for only 75 years and it's existence is anti-therical to the Judaist belief itself)

but look at the Israeli hostages that Hamas took, i am looking at them and i see people forgotten by their government and used as an excuse to annihilate Palestinians. When revealed by a released hostage that hamas keeps them in tunnels Israel announces they will flood the tunnels with nerve gas. if you lack reading comprehension let me repeat. when Israel learns where their hostages are kept they decide to just kill everyone inside, alongside their citizens they care so much about and genocide Palestinian population over. When Hamas offers to release the hostages under the condition of ceasefire, Israel denies. Three times. Israel has killed around 50 of their own people since the 7th of October because you guessed it ! the only thing they care about is wiping the Palestinians out. The families of the hostages are calling for an immediate ceasefire.

The blindness of you people is incomprehensible. your ignorance blows my mind. one look at the map, one quick read about the history of Palestine and Israel, one look at the military forces, the number of martyrs, tells you all you need to know about this "war" that isn't a war but an ethnic cleansing that Israel has been doing since 1948.

Pray for the peaceful rest of those martyred and never forget. But most importantly pray for the living Palestinians and a free Palestine.

[solspina]

Hello! I saw that your request box is open if this doesn’t suit your taste you can ignore this.

Could you write a hurt to comfort fic that involves a workaholic Guilliman and his politically married wife?

They knew they had being married to a primark would be rough but they didn’t think it would be so emotionally draining/lonely. Guilliman finally decides to do something and acknowledges his wife when one day she’s considering divorce and there are TOO many suitors waiting to have her hand.

Could you add how Robute pines for her but doesn’t know how to show how he loves her because he’s trying to manage a dying imperium and he doesn’t think he’s worth loving?

Never Again Will I be Gone

roboute guilliman ⋆˙⟡

i deeply apologize if this is rushed, i couldn’t figure out how to end it and it may be a little all over the place, but i hope it is enjoyed nonetheless!

why spill blood if things can be handled peacefully? guilliman is far too afraid of becoming attached or falling in love with his wife, and eventually she places the most dreaded option on the table for him. when tragedy befalls her, guilliman can hold his act of withdrawal no longer

warnings: blood, distant ass guilliman

how she had gone from being an incredibly privileged noblewoman to the wife of the last remaining primarch, she did not know.

there was a point in time she had believed she was a beacon of hope for her people. once her father’s reign was over, she would finally be able to restore peace to her planet, heal the sick and the dying, uplift the thousands that resided there from poverty. It was only when she stood on the altar and was encapsulated within the piercing blue gaze of roboute guilliman that she realized her people could not be saved.

the planet she resided on, the one she was supposed to rule, had an astonishing militia. the imperium did not wish extinction upon an innocent colony, nor did they want to challenge a planet that would undeniably put up a fight. teaching her father the ways of the emperor was far easier than trying to convince him that a woman could lead or be of any importance.

that ideal had been drilled in her head her entire life. she was to be married off from the day she was born. not a single suitor met her father’s standards, for none of them held enough power, until guilliman.

but it was fulgrim who convinced guilliman to take a wife in the first place. her planet was dangerous. if a peaceful negotiation was on the table, why sacrifice any lives?

fulgrim relaxed in his chair, pulling his wine glass away from his lips with a sly but genuine smile on his face. “you don’t have to love her guilliman. ive wed dozens of women. we do this out of necessity for peace, not out of love.” he said, his tone aloof and dismissive. guilliman hated to admit that his brother was right, thousands of his sons and innocent humans did not need to lose their lives when peace was on the table. “besides,” fulgrim added, his eyes gleaming with mischief and something akin to lust. “she is quite beautiful. i’d watch your back, i’ve heard others deeply desire an opportunity with her” guilliman’s expression remained stale and unmoving from the papers on his desk, though an unfamiliar feeling flickered through his eyes at the thought of someone else coveting his soon to be wife. was this possession?

“sure thing, brother.” guilliman replied, cold, unfeeling, and professional as usual.

he did not get to meet her until their wedding day, and quite beautiful she was. gorgeous fragile, and timid. her cowardice in his presence was something he was not anticipating of a noble, let alone the daughter of an incredibly cruel king. yet her eyes, glassy with tears, looked upon her people with great sympathy and sadness. they looked back at her the same way. she was not cruel, she was kind. these people were being ripped away of the only kindness they had been shown from their rulers.

when her father approached the two of them, she seemed to shrink into guilliman, clinging to his arm as if her father would rip her away the moment he got close enough. the king’s gaze shifted back and forth between guilliman and the girl, before her wrist was grabbed with such force guilliman swore he heard a crack. “i’d like to say goodbye to my dearest daughter” the man said, cooing as she whimpered at the pressure on her wrist, her hand turning blue.

guilliman’s eyes narrowed as he wrapped an arm around her. “release her, and say your goodbyes here, then.” he stood sternly, eyeing the girl’s hand. her father let go, not expecting such a protective tone from the primarch. “i will not depart from my wife.”

he protected her from her father, sure. but his words were a lie. for he did not have to love her.

throughout 6 months of marriage, he had only allowed himself to see her a dozen or so times, each meeting brief and rushed. his sons took great care of her in his absence, always sure to carefully to reply to every “where’s lord guilliman?” with a flat and prompt “he’s busy”.

the only time she remembered physical contact with him was the kiss they shared their wedding day, and the occasional brushing of hands when she handed him his paperwork. being allowed to sit in his office and watch him do his work was a rare and very awkward occurrence. she had her own room. her own space. she should spend time there instead. neither her or her belongings were allowed in guilliman’s personal quarters, anything to stop her sweet and intoxicating scent from getting on his sheets. anything to stop him from falling in love. he does this out of necessity, he has no time for love. he did not have to love her.

he’d admire her from a distance instead, or he’d submerge himself in papers and documents to avoid catching a glimpse of her. she’d sit in her room, contemplating the blank tear stained divorce papers that sat upon her dresser as she traced her fingers over the contours in her wedding ring. all the paper needed was guilliman’s signature.

her quarters were still close to his despite being separated. he heard her cries at night, incredibly often. comfort, she needs comfort. she needs warmth. he’s been in that room before, it’s so… so cold. he knew, and yet never once did he act on it. instead, he sat alone in his room doing paperwork by the warmth of his fireplace, the cracking flames helping drown out her sobs. he did his best to ignore them. he did not have to love her.

sometimes he couldn’t help but stop and listen, pressing his ear against the cold wall, knowing just how freezing and lonely it must be past the walls of his massive and elaborate quarters. his bed was more than big enough for the both of them, and he mulled over the thought many times. it didn’t matter, a little cold wouldn’t kill her, he did not have to love her.

one particular night, though, guilliman did not hear her crying as usual. her sobs and the sounds of the fire were replaced by heavy footsteps approaching his door. the heavy metal boots of cato sicarius were unmistakable as he made his way toward the primarch, a stern but panicked look across his features. Something about the look on cato’s face caused guilliman’s heart to quicken.

“my lord” cato’s voice was close to trembling, sweat pooling on his forehead “it’s lady guilliman… she’s hurt” cato’s voice echoed despite his panting. guilliman rose to his feet with an urgency he had never before felt toward his wife, his heart filled with a mix of panic, confusion, and anger.

“how badly?” he asked with a hint of controlled fury behind the question, every millisecond that passed causing him to dread every possible answer more and more until his heart felt as if it would beat out of his chest.

“she is in critical condition, my lord” the worst possible outcome rang through cato’s lips, but fell on deaf ears as the primarch plowed past him, walking directly to the medical unit and ignoring anything attempting to grab his attention along the way.

guilliman cursed to himself. to hear her cry was one thing, to long for her was one thing, but to be absent and allow her to become fatally injured?

when he arrived in the medical bay, multiple medicae surrounded the bloody and trembling body of lady guilliman. tears poured from her eyes despite her state of near-unconsciousness, the clear wound left by none other than the claws of the night haunter was swollen and crimson, it’s bright redness mixed with black screamed at guilliman. he should’ve been there. there was not an excuse in the universe that would satisfy the fact he was blind enough to let konrad curze get his filthy hands on his wife.

“where’s… guilliman…” she choked out, past her exhaustion and teary eyes.

one of the nurses seemed to tense up at her sad and confused expression. despite his constant absence, despite the papers for divorce he had found on his desk, she still cried out for him. “i apologize my lady, he’s busy” the nurse responded, watching her face twist into a look of defeat. he’d already signed the papers, had them prepared for her, and placed them on her nightstand in her quarters.

his heart could hold its true feelings no longer as he felt it begin to crumble. “i’m here.” his voice announced his presence as he approached her bedside, the nurse who cared for her widened her eyes in shock, swiftly stepping to the side to allow guilliman to see his wife. she reached up weakly with a single one of her tiny hands. her eyes were half lidded, confused and full of sorrow.

he stepped forward, reaching out his own hand to grab onto hers. “you’re really here…” she whispered, a small smile upon her features. “you found my papers, guilliman?”

his smile, once mirroring hers, faded into the slightest frown. “yes.” he responded. his voice cold and yet sorrowful. “they are signed but,” he paused, wanting a moment to consider the weight of the words on his tongue. “I cannot let you return home until you have recovered.”

she frowned. “i don’t want to go back home, roboute.” he tensed at her use of his first name, the only piece of his identity that was truly his own. “but there i had my people, and here i have nothing at all…” her voice broke as she cried, the pain of her wound overwhelming her as the machines stitching her wound together brought healing alongside pain. Exhausted and in something akin to agony, tears began to stream down her face.

“then i will give you everything” he replied with a solemn vow, turning to face the nurse as she nodded toward the primarch, the machine finishing its work and signaling to him that she was free to go as long as she did not walk or strain her body for a few days. he, for the first time, lifted his wife into his arms with more gentleness than that of which a primarch was capable.

he carried her into his room, past her own freezing cold quarters. he’d have her personal belongings moved within the next few days. Gently, he lay her on the soft rug next to his fireplace, not wanting to stain his bedsheets with her blood or hurt her as his period of scheduled rest passed. he removed his own armor, placing it to the side with ease before moving over to his bed. He did not lie down, instead grabbing a soft blanket and draping it over her body, ensuring she stayed warm. He sat next to her, placing her head on his thigh as she nestled into him for both comfort and warmth.

perhaps his scheduled rest meant nothing at all. damn the schedule. he had more important things to attend to now, and those marines of his were more than competent enough to handle it. his focus now was on nothing more than his wife, the girl who lay with her head in his lap as he stroked her head, memorizing every hair on her scalp like he should’ve long ago.

she shifted in her sleep, her body instinctively cuddling closer to her husband, thankful for the warmth she had always longed for. she did not cry on this night. he placed his hand over her shoulder and leaned back against the wall, his heart finally willing to admit the truth. he did not have to love her, but he did. by the emperor, he did.

[papenathys]

Hey Mimi do you have any recommendations for books set in Latin America (any genre) ?

So I am going to assume that you are not asking for picks like Gabriel Garcia Marquez or Isabel Allende. Most of the Latinx authors I read are unfortunately fantasy or genre fiction set in the USA (I'm trying to remember if Tehlor Kay Mejia or Anna-Marie McLemore wrote a book that is explicitly set in a Latin American country.)

Here are a couple of books I enjoyed, or at least feel confident recommending based on what I remember:

Certain Dark Things by Silvia Moreno-Garcia (adult, urban fantasy, horror): Described by the author as a "violent neo-noir", this story is set in an alternate, gritty Mexico City, and follows a Tlāhuihpochtli vampire who strikes a bond with an impoverished street kid, while fleeing from narco-vampire clans, criminal gangs, and other dangers lurking in the dark underbelly of the city.

Gods of Jade and Shadow by Silvia Moreno-Garcia (adult, historical fiction, fantasy): In 1920s Mexico, a young woman accidentally frees the spirit of the Mayan God of Death, and embarks on a cross-country mission with him: from the dazzling Jazz Age opulence of Mexico City, into the darkness of the Mayan underworld– where she must face great dangers to reinstate the God on his rightful throne.

Mexican Gothic by Silvia Moreno-Garcia** (adult, historical fiction, horror): A glamorous, fun-loving socialite in 1950s Mexico receives a disturbing letter from her married cousin, prompting her to travel down to their ancestral mansion, where the in-laws' live. There, on that ancient, colonial estate, she begins to be haunted by an equally ancient evil, and soon realises something is terribly wrong about the family her cousin has married into.

Tender is The Flesh by Agustina Bazterrica** (adult, dystopia, horror): In a near-dystopian future, an infectious virus turns all animal meat poisonous and unfit for consumption, forcing governments to legalize the factory-farming, breeding and eating of human meat. At one such processing plant, a worker is faced with a moral dilemma when he is gifted a "live" specimen.

Elena Knows by Claudia Piñeiro (adult, psychological thriller): Set in Argentina, this is a claustrophobic, uneasy novella about a mother's journey to uncover the truth behind the hushed-up murder of her dead daughter; the investigative mission, however, is made difficult by her advanced locomotive disability and age, as well as by this slowly unfurling realization: that she may not have known her daughter as truly as she thought.

And a couple I have not read/read and did not enjoy at all, but would recommend because my opinion seems to be in the minority:

Jawbone by Mónica Ojeda** (adult, horror, thriller, LGBTQ): A group of wealthy teenage girls attending an elite academy in Ecuador begin to convene regularly in an abandoned building, after school hours– but what started out as a place to exchange ghost stories, soon devolves into a site of dangerous thrill-seeking and dark, bloody rituals. (Note: I absolutely despised it, but you may enjoy; it's sapphic dark academia with cosmic horror and yellowjackets vibes).

Our Share of Night by Mariana Enríquez (adult, horror, historical fiction, fantasy): Set partially during the years of Argentina's brutal military dictatorship, this novel follows a father and son on a road trip, trying to escape a death cult, who have committed unspeakable atrocities. I have not read this gigantic tome, but I really want to, I am a sucker for horror rooted in political/historical allegories.

Cantoras by Carolina De Robertis (adult, historical fiction, LGBTQ): In 1977 Uruguay, a time when oppressive militia rule criminalized homosexuality as a dangerous transgression, five queer women discover an uninhabited cape, and claim the coastal sanctuary for themselves. Over years, it becomes their one safe haven, to be their true selves. Not read this, but it sounds strikingly similar to Last Summer at Bluefish Cove, one of my favourite queer stories of all time.

[ Note: All the stories are adult and given my inclination towards horror and psychological fiction, they are likely to be dealing with sensitive issues, but for the stories marked ** I very highly recommend checking trigger warnings ]

[longliveblackness]

Known as the Primer Libertador de America or “first liberator of the Americas,” Gaspar Yanga led one of colonial Mexico’s first successful slave uprisings and would go on to establish one of the Americas earliest free black settlements.

Rumored to be of royal lineage from West Africa, Yanga was an enslaved worker in the sugarcane plantations of Veracruz, Mexico. In 1570 he, along with a group of followers, escaped, fled to the mountainous regions near Córdoba, and established a settlement of former slaves or palenque. They remained there virtually unmolested by Spanish authorities for nearly 40 years. Taking the role of spiritual and military leader, he structured the agricultural community in an ordered capacity, allowing its growth and occupation of various locations.

During that time, Yanga and his band, also known as cimarrónes, were implicated in the disruption and looting of trade goods along the Camino Real (Royal Road) between Veracruz and Mexico City. They were also held responsible for attacking nearby haciendas and kidnapping indigenous women. Perceived as dangerous to the colonial system of slavery through their daring actions against royal commerce and authority, New Spain’s viceroy called for the annihilation of Yanga’s palenque. Destroying the community and its leader would send a message to other would-be rebellious slaves that Spain’s authority over them was absolute.

In 1609, Spanish authorities sent a well-armed militia to defeat Yanga and his palenque but were defeated. Yanga’s surprise victory over the Spanish heightened the confidence of his warriors and the frustration in Mexico City.

After defeating other Spanish forces sent again the palenque, Yanga offered to make peace but with eleven conditions, the most important being recognition of the freedom of all of the palenque’s residents prior to 1608, acknowledgment of the settlement as a legal entity which Yanga and his descendants would govern, and the prohibition of any Spanish in the community. Yanga, in turn, promised to serve and pay tribute to the Spanish crown. After years of negotiations, in 1618, the town of San Lorenzo de Los Negros was officially recognized by Spanish authorities as a free black settlement. It would later be referred to as Yanga, named after its founder.

•••

Conocido como el primer libertador de las Americas, Gaspar Yanga lideró exitosamente una de las primeras revueltas de esclavos en el México colonial y estableció una de las primeras ciudades negras y libres de América.

Se rumoreaba que era del linaje real de África Occidental. Yanga fue un esclavo que trabajó en las plantaciones de caña de azúcar de Veracruz, México. En 1570, él junto con un grupo de sus partidarios, se escaparon y huyeron hacia las montañas ubicadas en las regiones cercanas a Córdoba y estableció la primer ciudad o asentamiento para antiguos esclavos, también llamado palenque. Prácticamente permanecieron ahí por casi cuarenta años, sin ser molestados por las autoridades Españolas. Tomando el rol de guía espiritual y militar, él organizó la comunidad agrícola con una capacidad ordenada, así permitiendo el crecimiento y ocupación de varias ubicaciones.

Durante este tiempo, Yanga y su banda, también conocidos como cimarrones, estuvieron implicados en la interrupción y saqueo de bienes comerciales a lo largo del Camino Real entre Veracruz y Ciudad de México. También se les responsabilizó por los ataques a las haciendas cercanas y de secuestrar a mujeres indígenas. Percibido como un peligro para el sistema colonial de la esclavitud, sus audaces acciones contra el comercio y la autoridad real hicieron que el virrey de Nueva España pidiera la aniquilación del palenque de Yanga. El destruir a la comunidad y a su líder enviaría un mensaje a otros posibles esclavos rebeldes de que la autoridad de España sobre ellos era absoluta.

En 1609, las autoridades españolas enviaron una milicia fuertemente armada para derrotar a Yanga y su palenque, pero fueron derrotadas. La sorpresiva victoria de Yanga sobre los españoles aumentó la confianza de sus guerreros y la frustración en la Ciudad de México.

Después de derrotar a otras fuerzas españolas enviadas nuevamente al palenque, Yanga se ofreció a hacer las paces pero con once condiciones, siendo la más importante el reconocimiento de la libertad de todos los que residían en el palenque desde antes de 1608, el reconocimiento del asentamiento como entidad legal que sería gobernado por Yanga y sus descendientes, y la prohibición de cualquier español en la comunidad. Yanga, a su vez, se comprometió a servir y rendir homenaje a la corona española. Después de años de negociaciones, en 1618, el pueblo de San Lorenzo de Los Negros fue reconocido oficialmente por las autoridades españolas como un asentamiento negro y libre. Más tarde se la conocería como Yanga, en honor a su fundador.

[whencyclopedia]

Battles of Saratoga

The Battles of Saratoga (19 September and 7 October 1777) marked the climactic end of the Saratoga Campaign during the American Revolutionary War (1775-1783). The battles, which resulted in the surrender of an entire British army, convinced France to enter the war as a United States ally and are therefore considered a major turning point in the American Revolution.

Background

On 20 June 1777, General John Burgoyne led a British army of 8,300 men out of Canada, intent on seizing the Hudson River Valley and capturing Albany, New York. The Hudson River was considered by many to be the key to the American continent, and Burgoyne believed that its capture would allow him to isolate and suppress the New England colonies, thereby cutting the fledgling United States in half. Burgoyne led his army down Lake Champlain to the vital stronghold of Fort Ticonderoga, which the British effortlessly captured on 6 July. After defeating Ticonderoga's fleeing garrison at the Battle of Hubbardton (7 July), the British arrived at Fort Edward, on the Hudson. By this point, Burgoyne felt confident enough to write to Lord George Germain, the British colonial secretary, that he expected New England to fall in a matter of weeks.

Meanwhile, the Northern Department of the American Continental Army scrambled to mount a defense. General Philip Schuyler, who had previously overseen the Northern Department, was blamed for the loss of Ticonderoga and was relieved from command. He was replaced by General Horatio Gates, an ambitious officer who had long been seeking the glory of an independent command. On 3 August, Gates arrived at Stillwater, a small town along the Hudson where the ragtag units of the northern American army had begun to coalesce. Joining Gates at Stillwater were several officers and units who had been sent north by the American commander-in-chief, General George Washington, to aid in the Hudson's defense; these included General Benedict Arnold, a fiery-tempered soldier from Connecticut, as well as the popular New Englander General Benjamin Lincoln, and Virginian Colonel Daniel Morgan, whose Rifle Corps was already noted for its sharpshooting prowess. All told, Gates found approximately 8,500 effective troops at Stillwater.

As Gates' army continued to gather, the British expedition began to falter. On 15 August, nearly 1,000 of Burgoyne's German troops were killed, wounded, or captured by a Vermont militia at the Battle of Bennington. Meanwhile, a secondary British army had failed to capture Fort Stanwix on the Mohawk River and had retreated back into Canada, isolating Burgoyne's primary force. Despite these setbacks, and although his supplies were rapidly dwindling, Burgoyne refused to entertain the possibility of retreat and continued to push toward Albany. Gates, perhaps at Benedict Arnold's instigation, decided to meet this threat head-on and marched his army 10 miles (16 km) north toward the town of Saratoga. On 7 September, Gates' army occupied Bemis Heights, a bluff that sat about 200 feet (60 m) above the river and was covered in dense forests and ragged terrain. Polish engineer Tadeusz Kościuszko oversaw the construction of a series of fortifications atop the heights, which Gates' soldiers sheltered within.

Continue reading...