#Diatribe

[arsenicfetuz]

ou

[daemonicdasein]

‘Oh my Father, Lord of Silence, Supreme God of Desolation, though mankind reviles yet aches to embrace, strengthen my purpose to save the world from a second ordeal of Jesus Christ and his grubby mundane creed. Two thousand years have been enough. Show man instead the raptures of Thy kingdom. Infuse in him the grandeur of melancholy, the divinity of loneliness, the purity of evil, the paradise of pain. What perverted imagination has fed man the lie that Hell festers in the bowels of the Earth? There is only one Hell, the leaden monotony of human existence. There is only one Heaven, the ecstasy of my Father's kingdom.’

‘Nazarene, charlatan, what can you offer humanity? Since the hour you vomited forth from the gaping wound of a woman, you've done nothing but drown man's soaring desires in a deluge of sanctimonious morality. You've inflamed the pubertal mind of youth with your repellent dogma of original sin. And now you absolve in denying them the ultimate joy beyond death by destroying me? But you will fail, Nazarene, as you have always failed. We were both created in man's image, but while you were born of an impotent God, I was conceived of a jackal. Born of Satan, the desolate one, the nail. Your pain on the cross was but a splinter compared to the agony of my father. Cast out of heaven, the fallen angel, banished, reviled. I will drive deeper the thorns into your rancid carcass, you profaner of vices. Cursed Nazarene. Satan, I will avenge thy torment, by destroying the Christ forever.’

— Damien Thorn (portrayed by Sam Neil), Omen III: The Final Conflict (1981), directed by Graham Baker; written by Andrew Birkin.

[daily-cool-words]

Today's word of the day is...

Diatribe

[Noun]

Definition: A forceful, bitter verbal attack against somebody/something. A tirade.

Example Sentence: Jason laughed bitterly and launched into a diatribe against his brother.

[chromacandii]

Rock on, Rez!!! || DIATRIBE

[iminaloine]

A Tangent on Why Queer Family Matters to Me (pretty long)

One thing that really irritates the fuck out of me is when homophobes try to denounce same-sex parents under the guise of their kids needing a proper mother and father figure in their life. Now obviously I think that's complete horseshit. The funny thing is I didn't realise why it irritated me so much until earlier this year.

When I was younger I would question why I was so unbothered by the LGBTQ+ community despite coming from a country that actively reviles it and views it as a crime (Nigeria). Even figuring out that I was bi and nb didn't really feel like an 'aha!' moment. I literally just straight up got a crush on a girl in the middle of high school and spent a month reevaluating my entire being and just came out the other end like "huh. guess that's a thing now". It never felt like a big deal, because it never felt like it was "out of the ordinary" to be queer in the first place.

I only just realised early this year that it's because I was raised by two women; my mom and her childhood best friend platonically moved in together way before I was born. My dad dipped early, so I literally grew up in a household that was completely different from the heteronormative structure that a big chunk of society still views as the norm. And yeah, even though they're both the biggest cishets to have ever cishayed, they still raised me and my sibling well. Pretty fucking well, in fact. And in doing so they taught me that there is literally no concrete picture of 'family'. As long as you love the hell out of each other and stick together then you meet that criteria. That fact is something that will always be important to me. And it honestly boggles my mind that despite this pretty clear-cut concept, a lot of people still find it hard to grasp? Like I've gotten into so many arguments with people who think that this belief is the mic drop of the year, and like—it's really not??

And hearing about more people who were raised in homes that didn't make gender/sexuality out to be something that's set in stone (because it isn't) makes me feel really happy because like, YEAH! A person's identity 1. isn't something that they have to be sure of right off the bat, and it's okay (healthy, even) for parenting styles to support that, and 2. DOESN'T make your parents terrible people because they're depriving you of the father/mother you never had, or whatever. Like I understand that there are some levels of nuance to this argument but just. To anyone who has this opinion, I just want to stress this.

Dysfunctional families are not caused by same-sex parents. They are caused by dysfunctional parents and/or family members, irrespective of sexuality or gender identity.

Those two ideas can coexist, and even intersect! But one does not equal the other. And having the conventional idea of the nuclear family be basically mythologised by conservatives or homophobes (or both) just paints queer people as horrible parents for just existing, while upholding the idea that as long as a family has a mother and a father, they're Perfectly Splendid. Which is a pretty damaging narrative to hold on to. I know I'm definitely privileged to have the family I do because a lot of queer people don't, and that's why this whole thing makes me so mad. Because according to some, maybe a lot of people, my family isn't valid. It's other. It's wrong. And that's a really ignorant take.

But yeah, that's my way too long, extremely unstructured tangent that was probably just a rant but I needed to get it out of me. But hey, I'm barely an adult, my opinion on this topic probably doesn't even matter anyway, thank you

[xnoybiss]

I think that everyone should listen to Diatribe !

[jayjtheunsispiciousmelodicathem]

sometimes things will simply come easy to you, and that's okay

I understand it may feel bad for making more progress at something than someone else has in the same timespan (or maybe even a longer one) - I feel this way myself a lot

it may feel bad to share your progress with others in fear of making them feel bad

but the reality is that people are different - the entire human population is just a giant noise map of learning speeds and the subjects they learn easier

it may feel bad, but you're not guilty of anything - as long as you're humble about that and encourage others to keep going, you're very much fine!

don't abandon something just because "it came too easy for you"

keep going, and inspire others

[thethirdman8]

Needs music most definitely 🎶 Diatribe Oliver Michael

Natural light revealing the individual particles of steam coming off hot coffee

Source                          

[divinefeminineai]

Diatribe

[eliyah-de-dark]

Okay not to overthink this or anything, but watching endless amounts of Pre-K programs with my toddler makes scary games/stories surrounding kid's programming more unbelievable.

If you're gonna do that, you don't need to make it gory or violent. You literally just need to give it an uncanny nature. I just had an almost 25 minute existential crisis because Blue's Clues felt different than I remember. I haven't watched it in well over a decade, but my memory of it was so certain that watching it with my kid left me feeling like I couldn't be sure anymore.

I feel more genuine concern and maybe even fear about this than Amanda the Explorer or games in it's genre. Shout out to Angel Hare though, putting us in the position of the person trying to figure out what's wrong with their childhood show makes it far more unsettling

[shotbyshe]

Words of the Day

diatribe:

A bitter, abusive denunciation.

A continued discourse or disputation.

macher: An important person, often in the negative sense of self-important; a bigwig.

vicissitudes:

A change or variation.

A usually unforeseen change in circumstance or experience that affects one's life, especially in a trying way

The quality of being changeable; mutability.

obfuscation:

The act of obfuscating or obscuring; also, that which obscures; obscurity; confusion.

The act of darkening or bewildering; the state of being darkened.

The act or process of obfuscating, or obscuring the perception of something; the concept of concealing the meaning of a communication by making it more confusing and harder to interpret

To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand.

stolid:

Having or revealing little emotion or sensibility; impassive.

Hopelessly insensible or stupid; not easily aroused or excited; dull; impassive; foolish.

Having or revealing little emotion or sensibility

~~~~

A "medical professional" went on a diatribe about his past experiences with "people like me" (black women) instead of looking at my fucking chart and seeing that I'm like no other. After his diatribe, I told him that I neither had nor did any of what he spoke of and he felt really dumb. He ended up not even knowing what to do with me and just blamed everything on me being a black women 'cause I don't do anything but eat and sleep, so he couldn't find anything to blame my issue on. It was really funny and really sad.

I was watching Succession (b/c of course I was) and remembered how YouTube treated me for making reactions to it, EVEN THOUGH OTHERS ON YOUTUBE DO IT WITH NO PROBLEMS (I'm not bitter). Anyway I was hearing these words out of Kendall's mouth, and the way he's been using them in sentences is interesting.

~~ Oct. '23

[whats-in-a-sentence]

Though he conceded his neighbour's rhetoric was at times a little exaggerated, Jones endorsed Mudie in the diatribe he published in London, The Felonry of New South Wales:

I have been acquainted with you upwards of ten years, and during that period, I have never known anything in your conduct discreditable to you either as a magistrate or as a private gentleman. On the contrary, I believe you to have been an active, useful, and independent justice of the peace; and I consider your recent dismissal by his excellency the governor, from the commission of the peace, an arbitrary act, and an unjust abuse of the power vested in him as supreme ruler in this colony.

"Killing for Country: A Family History" - David Marr

[chromacandii]

DIATRIBE just makin their way through

if you like what I make check me out here:

Twitter

Linktree

[geeknik]

From Memories to Ecosystems: Considering the Implications of Annihilation and Obliteration

Introduction

The concepts of annihilation and obliteration have intrigued philosophers and scientists alike for centuries. On the surface, they may seem like synonyms referring simply to destruction or elimination. However, a deeper examination reveals important theoretical and practical differences between these two processes with wide-ranging implications across multiple domains.

In this essay, I seek to explore those differences and implications through a wide-ranging interdisciplinary lens. We will consider annihilation and obliteration from philosophical, psychological, environmental, and technological perspectives. What does it mean to completely destroy something versus merely erasing its existence? How do these concepts relate to memory, identity, ecosystems, and data? How might their application impact ethics, recovery, and restoration?

These questions have taken on new relevance in our modern world. Advancing technologies give us unprecedented power to manipulate information, alter environments, modify behaviors, and engineer life itself. As our capabilities grow, so too do the potential consequences - intended and unintended - of annihilating versus obliterating. With great power comes great responsibility, as the saying goes. It is imperative we carefully examine the subtle distinctions between these concepts and how they might propagate through complex, interconnected systems in sometimes unpredictable ways.

The essay will proceed as follows. First, I will delineate the philosophical differences between annihilation and obliteration and their implications for identity, memory, and ethics. Next, I will apply these concepts to psychological phenomena like forgetting, amnesia, and trauma. Shifting perspectives, I will then explore environmental analogues regarding ecological restoration versus eradication. Finally, building on these foundations, I will consider the unique challenges annihilation and obliteration pose in technological domains like data storage, cybersecurity, and genetic engineering. My aim is to provide a multi-layered examination of these deep concepts and stimulate thoughtful discussion on responsible application across scientific disciplines. Let us begin our exploration.

Philosophical Differences

At the core, annihilation and obliteration represent two contrasting philosophical stances on existence and possibility. Annihilation, derived from the Latin nihil or "nothing," implies total negation and elimination without remainder. The annihilated entity ceases to be - its existence is rendered null and void. Obliteration, on the other hand, stems from the Latin term litera meaning "letter." To obliterate is to erase or remove the outward traces or marks of something while leaving open whether the underlying essence still persists in some disembodied form.

These distinctions carry profound implications for metaphysics and identity. Annihilation of an entity entails annihilation of its intrinsic properties and relations as well. Nothing is left to resuscitate. Obliteration, by contrast, severs external manifestations but potentially preserves an absent yet indefinitely recoverable substratum. Something obliterated still exists, just not in its previous embodied state. It retains the possibility of remanifestation through new expressions.

Consider the annihilation of a lake versus its obliteration. Annihilating the lake destroys the total ecological network - water, sediments, flora, fauna, and their dynamic interrelations. The lake is gone forever without prospect of returning. Obliterating the lake, however, erases only its surface traits while the deeper hydrological and geological infrastructure endures. Conditions remain suitable to refill the lake basin and rebuild its outward form, given sufficient time and the right sequence of events.

Similar analyses apply to concepts of memory, thought, and identity. Annihilating a recollection razes it entirely from the mind's archives, precluding any chance of spontaneous resurgence. Obliterating a memory obscures current access yet leaves intact ethereal traces that environmental triggers could potentially reinscribe in awareness once more. An annihilated belief dies absolutely, while an obliterated belief persists in dormant potential awaiting reactivation. On an existential level, annihilation of the self destroys unique consciousness while obliteration of the self fragments but may reconstruct personal continuity.

These musings touch on thorny questions of persistence through constant change that have puzzled metaphysicians for ages. They also raise important ethical issues. While annihilation ensures deep-seated removal, it deals an absolute blow precluding all future utility. Obliteration maintains a softer, conditional abolition that preserves prospects for redeeming value under new auspices. Annihilation deals in final verdicts, obliteration in open-ended contingencies. Both classifications warrant considered application fitting their diverse outcomes and implications for sentient experience across space and time.

Psychological Ramifications

Shifting perspective from philosophy to psychology, we find annihilation and obliteration emerge as useful analytical lenses for understanding phenomena of cognitive continuity and disruption. In particular, the concepts relate intimately to memory and its complex interplay of formation, storage, degradation, and retrieval over the lifespan.

Consider first the process of ordinary forgetting. As memories age and compete for limited neurological resources, their representations within neural networks gradually weaken and diffuse. Forgetting through decay obliterates memory traces, blurring clarity and eroding contextual links, without wholly destroying intrinsic content. The bare bones of past experiences persist prone to reemergence under conditions restoring sufficient activation levels. Thus routine forgetting aligns more with obliteration than annihilation, preserving dormant potential for eventual recall given optimal retrieval cues.

Contrast this with situations of damage or pathology inflicting more thorough disruption. Korsakoff's syndrome following thiamine deficiency frequently annihilates the ability to form new episodic recollections, while leaving general semantic memory largely intact. The specific neurobiological lesions annihilate a key memory faculty yet do not destroy all cognitive functions. Traumatic brain injuries sometimes annihilate whole segments of autobiographical history, eliminating any prospect of natural recovery without external aids. Here physical harm wields an absolute eraser eliminating once-lived periods from subjective consciousness forever.

Temporary states like hypnotic amnesia or transient global amnesia moreover demonstrate memory's malleability between obliteration and annihilation. Skilled hypnotic suggestion can obliterate access to designated memories in trance, evidenced by their subsequent restoration on cue. Yet repeated hypnotic practice risks transitioning obliteration into effective annihilation as strengthened ego boundaries wall off altered states. In transient global amnesia too, extremely vivid memories may suffer thorough annihilation with no reminders remaining, while less salient details face mere obliteration surmountable through external reconstruction.

Contemplating these contrasts holds implications for understanding identity, trauma, and treatment. Memory encodes self-narrative and separates persons across time, so its erasure impacts continuity. Annihilating recollections shatters links within personal stories, threatening dissociation. Obliterating memories clouds intrapsychic cohesion yet allows reconstructing meaning through narrative reintegration with empathic aid. Trauma often annihilates devastating experiences too anguishing to consciously hold, yet unconscious traces may yet obliterate in ways psychotherapy can retrieve for healing reconstruction of life purpose. Conceiving normal forgetting and pathology along annihilation-obliteration spectra likewise informs expectation management in therapeutic efforts to reawaken or replace lost pieces of the past.

Environmental Echoes

Moving our inquiry from mind to nature, we find annihilation and obliteration provide apt analogues for conceptualizing ecosystem dynamics as well. Commonly in conservation, scientists and policymakers face choices between extirpating problematic invasive species through eradication programs, versus controlling and containing their spread through intensive management leaving room for potential recovery.

Eradication aims to annihilate target populations, eliminating their genes from the gene pool forever. It typically requires applying measures to extinguish all individuals of the undesired kind with no survivors. Once successful, eradication annihilates the invasive presence at a location and prevents any future recolonization from internal regeneration. However, eradication efforts also risk inadvertent collateral damage affecting native species and total ecosystem services. They constitute an all-or-nothing gamble preferring irreversible change.

Contrasting this, containment and control policies hope to obliterate the immediate damaging impacts of invasives without annihilating their existence altogether. Through measures like hunting, trapping, poisoning or transgenic modification, managers suppress populations below economic or ecological thresholds to check their harm. But viable if dormant propagules likely persist in some reservoir, primed to reemerge should active management halt or environmental conditions become suitable once more. Containment accepts ongoing intervention and surveillance, yet maintains potential for ecological recovery if managers someday perfect less disruptive techniques.

Comparing specific case studies proves illuminating. For example, kudzu vine eradication across the southeastern U.S. targeted annihilation through herbicidal spraying and manual removal, eliminating the noxious invader over vast regions. Yet mongoose introduction to Hawaii merely obliterated their visibility and harm for decades until booming anew, necessitating constant control to check depredations. Similarly, fire ant eradication proved elusive and unsustainable on their scale, so integrated pest management obliterates local impacts through baiting while conceding the intrinsically challenging nature of total annihilation at continental dimensions.

These parallels carry insight for restoring degraded native habitats as well. Passive restoration through land protection and cessation of damaging activities merely obliterates human disturbance, ultimately relying on nature's own regenerative powers to gradually reconstruct prior complexity. Active restoration more closely resembles eradication through directly annihilating existing weed communities to replace them with planted natives. However, aggressive annihilation risks collateral harm and neglects dormant propagules, typically necessitating long-term oversight to check reinvasion. Alternatively, techniques like managed grazing or weed-smothering mulches emulate containment by obliterating undesirable flora without posing irreversible change, allowing quasi-natural succession over time.

Overall, the environmental metaphors impart perspective on choosing between annihilation and obliteration in conservation. Annihilation takes a riskier gamble promising categorical "solutions" yet vulnerable to unforeseen consequences should plans go awry. Obliteration accepts nature's inherent resilience and complexity, preferring patient intervention minimizing harm while maintaining open-ended potential. The optimal strategy often forgoes absolutes for incremental, reversible adaptations balancing ecological impacts.

Technological Quandaries

No discussion of annihilation and obliteration would prove complete without contemplating their ever-growing technological dimensions. As human ingenuity engineers novel ways to store, transmit and manipulate vast troves of digital data, these concepts take on vibrant new life interfacing mind to machine. Similarly, our accelerating mastery over genomes compels fresh understanding of their nuanced implications for guiding biological change.

In data storage, fields like cybersecurity confront core dilemmas around thoroughly annihilating versus temporarily obliterating sensitive files. Public policy, private industry and individual users each weigh these options according to their risk tolerance for potential recovery versus ensured elimination. While data annihilation guarantees removed contents stay vanquished, it precludes any future option to restore lost information should circumstantial needs or scrutiny arise. By contrast, robust data obliteration through schemes like disk scrubbing or degaussing leaves open reversing deletion attempts through expert data recovery under exceptional cause.

Of course, advanced forensic techniques continously narrow the gap between these "solutions." New developments in computer forensics and data carving algorithms complicate obliteration as a reliable security control by empowering resurrection of previously erased files. This highlights the permeable boundary between annihilation and obliteration in digital realms, as well as our imperfect capacities to reliably and permanently destroy code-based information according to intention. It also spotlights vulnerabilities should malicious actors one day wield techniques restoring obliterated content for coercive ends.

Comparable tradeoffs emerge regarding genetic intervention technologies. Gene drives aiming to alter or annihilate entire species' traits provoke intense discussion around irreversible impacts versus contained modification. Though powerful vector for controlling pest infestations or eradicating vector-borne diseases, critics emphasize gene drives' inability to contain accidentally released genetic alterations within political borders. Some envision "daisy-chain" effects rending native biodiversity globally through permanently removing target genotypes. Yet cautious genetic modification obliterating symptoms while leaving populations functionally intact could help control impacts pending tech's improvement or reversal.

Synthetic biology too wrestles with line between destruction and design. Early projects developing toxin-producing kill switches into custom organisms garnered warnings around life's intrinsic complexity resisting external annihilation. Accidents could proliferate autonomous killing machines contrary to initiate aims. Meanwhile research crafting bespoke organisms obliterate native traits preventing undesirable acts like toxin release, yet retain features enabling ecological function should containment succeed long-term. Some experts argue the latter constitutes more ethical approach aligning with nature's own balance of innovation, adaptation and conservatism over evolutionary time.

The dilemmas posed by emerging technologies highlight annihilation and obliteration as more than philosophical curiosities - they constitute vital concepts warranting prudent consideration as humanity accelerates the pace of targeted environmental and informational manipulation.

While powerful new tools promise immense benefits through precisely eliminating pathogens, uncontrollably proliferating data, or undesirable traits, the future remains inherently uncertain. Unforeseen side effects may propagate in unexpected ways through tangled networks resisting simplified models. Annihilating changes introduced with best intentions risk catastrophic cascades should minute flaws or alterations in boundary conditions unleash butterfly effects transforming original plans.

Obliteration serves a role maintaining flexibility for adaptation given surprises. Temporary reversibility reduces vulnerability through containing impact spectra while science and ethics march hand in hand improving techniques. With issues like climate change demanding urgent intervention at global scales inhospitable to delays, obliterating localized impacts through iterative refinement presents a rationally cautious path maximizing long-term resilience.

Conclusion

In closing, the wide-ranging discussion touched on here underscores annihilation and obliteration as concepts deserving nuanced consideration across scientific disciplines and applications. While seemingly denoting synonymous forms of destruction or removal, a deeper examination reveals their divergence carries profound theoretical and practical implications.

Annihilation implies total, permanent negation leaving no remainder or trace to potentially reconstruct existence. It deals in certainties and closed endings resistant to change. Obliteration instead represents conditional, open-ended erasure maintaining an absent yet recoverable substratum should restoring conditions emerge. It acknowledges complexity, contingency and ongoing flux as innate properties of complex systems defying simplistic solutions.

These philosophical distinctions percolate through diverse domains. Psychologically, they relate to the malleability of memory and possibilities for narrative redemption following trauma. Environmentally, they emerge as apt analogues for balancing irreversible ecological intervention against resilient, multifunctional landscapes. And technologically, they underscore open questions surrounding the reliability and reversibility of targeted information destruction or biological redesign.

Overall, a preference for obliteration over annihilation generally seems wise given persistent uncertainties. Its conditional, flexible approach minimizes potential for unforeseen cascading harm while leaving increased prospects for recovery and learning from experience. Of course, situations demanding irreversible removal to prevent overwhelming damage can justify annihilation's bolder gambles under exceptional circumstance.

But where moderation remains possible, obliteration offers a scientifically prudent middle path embracing nature's own predilection for balanced change through feedback over millennia. Its emphasis on incremental, reversible progress aligns well with addressing urgent global problems too intractable for absolutism yet meriting courageous solutions respecting complexity. Further interdisciplinary discussions can surely enrich understanding of these thought-provoking concepts and their ever-evolving role as humanity strives to bend technology and ecology to more compassionate ends.

[jamesgalgano]

desperate diatribe (on Wattpad) https://www.wattpad.com/1366077244-desperate-diatribe?utm_source=web&utm_medium=tumblr&utm_content=share_reading&wp_uname=semajrah&wp_originator=bEomfmmsbaQH8dm8jfs3aQvRvOy7a3fas7gtHIUNxrblmJf3z7plbAsMZzAwH8BYTM%2F%2B%2FT9y5Cmb1a4uhgWGKR3DiT5HxK9jzilHaagH1U2PVYd7M%2FIWuWVQagiI7MD9 Desperate diatribe By james a. galgano Here we go again down that spiraling path to nowhere slowly. Carrying our excess baggage of imperialist swine Past the metal detectors, which are unable to detect what is on our mind, yet struggles to do so in some quaint deity's name Our actions rationale and claim to fame, while we destroy all others existence for monetary gain, as well as the ability to iPhone. Our materialist desires every night , while acting so politically correct in displaying our might over matter, when you are the only super power, whom else do you have to flatter,but your own debased proclivities at the serious expense of elusive civility,