#Dissent Speaks universe

[zvaigzdelasas]

New York University led by troubling example when the school shared an updated code of student conduct last week. Ostensibly aimed at curtailing bigotry, the new language instead shuts down dissent by threatening to silence criticism of Zionism on campus. Students who speak out against Zionism — an ethno-nationalist political ideology founded in the late 19th century — will now risk violating the school’s nondiscrimination policies.[...]

Tucked into a document purportedly offering clarification on school policy, the new NYU guidelines introduce an unprecedented expansion of protected classes to include “Zionists” and “Zionism.” Referring to the university’s nondiscrimination and anti-harassment policy, known as NDAH, the updated conduct guide says, “Speech and conduct that would violate the NDAH if targeting Jewish or Israeli people can also violate the NDAH if directed toward Zionists.”[...]

“Using code words, like ‘Zionist,’” the guide says, “does not eliminate the possibility that your speech violates the NDAH policy.”[...]

The entire premise of the guidance — that “Zionist” must be functioning as a “code word — is a flaw egregious enough to reject the entire document outright.

The language here is of utmost importance. The text does not say that “Zionist” can and has been used by antisemites as a code word, which is no doubt true. Instead, it takes it as a given that, when used critically, “Zionist” simply is a code word.[...]

According to NYU’s guidance, then, Zionist and Zionism are either antisemitic dog whistles when invoked critically or a protected category akin to a race, ethnicity, or religious identity. Ethically committed and politically informed anti-Zionism — including the beliefs of many anti-Zionist Jews like myself who reject the conflation of our identity and heritage with an ethnostate project — is foreclosed, and the long history of Jewish anti-Zionism, which has existed as long as Zionism itself, is all but erased.[...]

“For many Jewish people, Zionism is a part of their Jewish identity,” the NYU guidance says. And this is of course true. That does not, however, make Zionism an essential part of Jewish identity.

There are conservative Christians for whom the damnation of homosexuality is a key part of their Christian faith too, but Republican lawfare to see homophobic positions enshrined as protected religious expression have been rightly and consistently condemned by the liberal mainstream.

“The new guidance sets a dangerous precedent by extending Title VI protections to anyone who adheres to Zionism, a nationalist political ideology, and troublingly equates criticism of Zionism with discrimination against Jewish people,” NYU’s Faculty for Justice in Palestine said in a statement in response to the updated conduct guide.[...]

“Furthermore, the new guidance implies that any nationalist political ideology (Hindu nationalism, Christian nationalism, etc.) that is integrated into some members of that group’s understanding of their own racial or ethnic identity should be entitled to civil rights protections.”

27 Aug 24

[fuckyeahisawthat]

I think Crowley falls into two of the classic pitfalls of people who see that the problems are systemic long before anyone else around them does: impatience and despair.

(Yes yes I know, “Crowley was an optimist.” Book Crowley is an optimist. I don’t think that line is particularly useful for analyzing TV Crowley. Stay with me here.)

Let it be said that 95% of the time, Crowley has the patience of a fucking saint (ssh don’t tell him) around Aziraphale. He knows that Aziraphale needs to build his little plausible deniability rationales in order to do something that they both know he wants to do (because it’s right or simply because he would enjoy it) but Heaven wouldn’t approve of. And most of the time, Crowley is happy to help Aziraphale get there, asking the questions Aziraphale is afraid to ask, offering excuses and justifications until Aziraphale finds one he can accept. He does a lot of work of parsing out when “no” means “you haven’t convinced me yet, keep trying” and pushing through all the “I’m an angel, you’re a demon, we’re on opposite sides and mine is the good one” talk that Aziraphale gets up to all the way through s1. Because he knows that Aziraphale doesn’t really believe that stuff, right? He just needs some time to talk himself around his own cognitive dissonance, and most of the time Crowley is not only happy to facilitate that but sees it as part of his role in their relationship.

But then when the chips are down and Aziraphale is still dithering, that’s when he gets frustrated, because HOW CAN YOU NOT SEE what’s been blindingly obvious to Crowley for millennia, that Heaven is just as cruel as Hell and no one is going to step in and fix it because the system is working as intended. And that’s when he says things like “how can someone as clever as you be so stupid?” Which is a surefire way not to convince the person you’re arguing with of anything.

And then there’s the despair. I really think the running away thing is not about cowardice or selfishness or some kind of unhealthy level of avoidance of hard or scary things, but about hopelessness. They’ve spent their lives avoiding very very real danger, and of the two of them Crowley is much more constantly aware of the danger that they are in from both sides. Yes he’s hypervigilant but he is also almost always right about the amount of danger they are in. Trying to get as far away from danger as possible is not an irrational response, even if it’s not always the correct one for a given situation.

When you feel like you’re the only person who sees how rotten the system is, how it needs to be dismantled entirely, but you are also VERY aware of how strong the people in power are and how ruthless they are about crushing dissent because you experienced it personally…well that gets fucking depressing after a while. Because even if you think the whole system needs to go, that feels like a completely unattainable goal when it seems like no one else even sees the problem, or if they see it, they are too afraid to do anything about it. And can you blame them? You know exactly what happens to people who speak up.

So it’s very easy for your goals to shrink from systemic change to just taking yourself and the people you love and finding somewhere for them to be as safe as possible, for as long as the system will let you exist. Because reforming the system is a fool’s errand, and dismantling it entirely seems impossible. I think this is where Crowley is at. Even if on some level he knows it’s an imperfect solution, because both of them have enough compassion that they would feel guilty abandoning Earth and humans to save themselves, and because Heaven and Hell really can find them anywhere in the universe. He just doesn’t see another option.

And look, I think Aziraphale is 100% wrong that Heaven can be reformed. But he is not wrong to want to stay and fight to make things better, even if it means sacrificing the Earthly comforts he loves so much, and even if it means doing it without Crowley by his side.

Ultimately they both need each other. Aziraphale needs Crowley for his willingness to ask questions and to see the scale of the problem, even if it’s terrifying. But Crowley needs Aziraphale for his hope, his stubborn determination to believe things can and should be better, and to fight for that. In the right hands, hope is an enormously powerful weapon.

[reinedeslys-central]

kotlc things that I keep thinking about that are never really addressed by canon

there is a complete replica of sophie's bedroom and perhaps countless other rooms just. somewhere in a building in mysterium that the councillors just know about.

alden and other telepaths were instructed to monitor the citizens' minds for signs of dissent around the time the prentice thing was going down

they regularly torture prisoners and dissenters into literal insanity that they can't come back from

they also have a super weird prison only accessible by quicksand (????) to house said prisoners

there is an ENTIRE DUNGEON OF WEIRD LAB EXPERIMENTS DOWN BY THE VACKER HOUSE?

okay. how - how big is havenfield?

the entire thing with - is their name twix? the person dex was working with for something. why do we not get to see that more. why is dex the criminally underrated goated character and WE DON'T GET FLESHED OUT CHARACTER ARCS FOR EVERYONE

linh flooded. atlantis. linh song FLOODED ATLANTIS hello what do people think about that?????????? do they see her on the street and whisper? what's up with "The Girl Of Many Floods"? Where else did she flood?

What is up with the song family (tong? their name changed after their grandmother or smth got famous with their music right?) that both their children not only have two very powerful elemental abilities, but are also crazy skilled with said Talents.

why are music, art, and culture not a bigger thing? like yeah, plot, obviously, but that's just worldbuilding!!! I wanna see!!!! art hanging on the walls! Defying gravity! more sculptures! more music playing in the shopping centres!! If they have imparters why don't they have long distance radio? are there mandatory dance lessons? what's the etiquette like besides what we already know?

more animal husbandry at schools. speaking of schools: we KNOW foxfire and exilium aren't the only schools. are smaller schools more specialised? are their community colleges or academies dedicated to specific career paths? universities?

okay but the polyglot ability is SO COOL???? tell me about the archaic variants of the enlightened language. there's no way that's just the elves' one language and the other species picked it up due to their 'superiority' or wtv. the goblins have cities of gold and metal and the trolls age backwards, you're not convincing me of anything.

secret societies in the other species. that has to exist right?

.....is squall dex's mom or not? I genuinely can't remember.

anyway remember when she froze gethen's fingernails off, yeah that happened (I think)

so instead of rehabilitating teenagers who have dangerous abilities and not much control over their powers, we just do....whatever the council did with gethen, ruy, and linh ig

hey, um...are we just not going to talk about dex casually HACKING INTO A GOV DATABASE WITH SOME RANDOM BITS OF ROCK AND TWINE? he can just do that. okay. okay. that's - yeah, okay.

did he match a frequency or something? how does the signal network even work in kotlc when everyone is technically all over the world in unplottable locations and they get around by LIGHT LEAPING???

ON THAT NOTE. light leaping. yeah haha funny let's just teach our kids to casually break down their very particles and hold onto their consciousness to travel at the speed of light using quantum mechanics and crystals that are specifically cut to project light in such a way that'll take you only to a specific location nvm im not thinking more about it.

flickering? is apparently a skill you can learn even if you're not a vanisher? remember in book two when fitz got prissy at sophie for knowing how to do it apparently b4 we figured out that she's a teleporter

keefe is a fun loveable goofball and I've always been on the sokeefe train but now the more I think about it he's really um.... yeah, uh, sophie? darling, please just don't date any of these people. obv you can make your own decisions but at least not now, okay. take care of yourself hon

the fitz hate is kinda weird ngl. wdym you don't want your problematic traitor brother to move back in to living literally with your family after supposedly losing his memories and that's a bad thing? wdym your close friend/crush is hiding things from you when yall are supposed to be cognates and she's kinda gaslighting you since, forever? wdym your father's been shadily telling you to stalk this girl in the human world since you were a kid? yeah definitely he does pull some weird stints throughout the series. but the bigger things i see ppl hating on him for are. hmmmmm

the council themselves choose to lock away the government secrets and wipe them from their memories. hey, um - recordkeeping is great, obvious, but - wiping those secrets from your minds isn't gonna help you lead while accounting for those parts of history, is it? nevermind how dangerous it is when there are huge species-wide secrets that NO ONE remembers. society-threatening incident waiting to happen.

the concept of vociferators. that's just kinda funny lol even if it is weird

are their schoold for diff abilities?

what's the genetics of talent inheritance? why are 'stronger' abilities rarer? In my opinion, p much every talent is goated, I don't see why more characters aren't more creative about it.

banning talents is just a bad move. like. are you serious? how is that going to make it better? that's how you get brant. brant was a pyrokinetic, without getting into the primary issue of the whole talentless/talented discrimination discourse, the secondary issue is he wouldve been able to marry jolie as two talented elves. would he have cracked if his ability was just a bit better handled by society?

grady is a mesmer. how - that's a really powerful ability???? how do you even train to use that? what do you even use it for?

same with whatever that lady councillor is that tried to seduce alden during his own wedding. fun times, yall.

rainbow fire??? cool????

so we have the sanctuary, do we also have a gigantic library of alexandria-esque thing? a botanical garden?

according to jolie's wiki she died at twenty as a level 8 at foxfire. so... hang on a minute. okay, sure, numerically that could make sense since sophie, at 12, became a level one - but are you telling me she went through the whole matchmaking process and was planning to get married that young????

hey, here's an idea - in a relatively stable society where economy is great, trust funds exist, people work to have something to do with their lives, birth rate is generally low (now through prejudice as well as societal comfort and ease/cost of living), why are they marrying so young? WHY ARE THE KIDS STARTING THE MATCHMAKING PROCESS IN THEIR TEENS???? the elven society has p much every mark of a stage 5 developed country? help? middle-high school human geography??

if they apparently live so long, show me the funny messy family trees with couples having children generations apart.

so, trust funds of lusters??? lustres?? (which we barely ever see. why is there little-to-no use of money?) which equate to roughly one trillion USD (in value? are you. are you - um. are you....serious?) exist. but I guess inflation and relative currency value from mass money printing doesn't count in this world, as well as the fact that there's only one currency for all the elves.

I wanna see a divorced elven couple now. how does divorce law work??????

if there's such a low BR and low population and people are yet still encouraged to have less kids to 'not dilute the genes' (that's my next point btw), I'm guessing matchmaking is encouraged younger to make sure population stays stable/growing? obv you need it to ensure genetic diversity and no incest, but if it's heavily encouraged for elves to have children like this, are queer elves mandated to have children with a surrogate/other couple even if they have a same-sex marriage?

i'll probably edit this or reblog it to include more stuff (character limit lol) as i remember the books bc it's been a hot minute since i read them.

[see-arcane]

How different are Dracula's Demeter and TLVOTD?

Oof. Okay. This is going to hurt me as a staunch THE BOOK IS ALWAYS BETTER believer, but.

The Last Voyage of the Demeter is very much the better story. By a wide margin.

Spoilers for The Last Voyage of the Demeter, Dracula's Demeter, and Dracula below

Just speaking on differences, TLVOTD does sadly tuck in that Universal Pictures nonsense about ~the sun hurts vampires~ and sacrifices some of the Captain's coolness and giving the Romanians and the Roma any respect due to the origins of the poor chick who got boxed up as a bloodbag stowaway. But it is still a very very well done Dracula as an Actual Goddamn Monster horror film. Even the close of the movie--yes, with more random action slapped on for cinematic reasons--leaves a door open for one last knife twist as OC Protagonist stalks off into the shadows to hunt Dracula down...

...and possibly accidentally-brilliantly nodding to a certain scene in the novel where the gang enters the Count's Piccadilly house and finds a bowl of bloodied water. RIP.

It's a good scary story and it built something enjoyable out of the Demeter chapter's foundation. Definitely a refreshing departure from the constant sexypire barrage of Draculas.

Dracula's Demeter feels like a con job by comparison.

Specifically because it opens so promisingly. It's very obvious that the author read Dracula front to back and loved what he read! He uses tons of direct lines from it! He has period accurate details dappled throughout for the Demeter's ship and crew! He does an admirable job of building up his own two Requisite Guy and Girl Stowaway Romance OCs so they can do Meaningful Things, just like TLVOTD's duo do! Dracula is sinister and erudite and--credit where it's due--delivers an absolutely nightmarish demise to poor Petrofsky. Holy shit.

With all that, you can forgive the kind of rough editing and the way that (parentheses) and ALL CAPS ACTION WORDS get sprinkled throughout like someone who just peeled their stuff straight from Ao3. It's fine, it's fun. At first.

And then shit goes downhill and straight into Dracufetishland: Naughty Nautical Edition.

Because it turns out that where TLVOTD had Required Girl Character get to be a whole person and not a gossamer-dressed sexy lamp (even having been chomped), DD's Required Girl gets chomped and immediately goes full 'lol my human boyfriend is a loser compared to Count Fuckula,' in a way I might forgive if we were going for some unrelated vampire's story--but no. This is a Dracula story and she's in full Coppola mode.

She gets turned, ogles what's left of her reflection so we can talk about how hard and visible her nips are in a borrowed shirt, gets Dracuhorny, and ditches her boyfriend.

And then, when Earnest Englishman Boyfriend tries to burn the ship and save the day, he gets burned alive, and then Dracula orders Vampire Girlfriend to garrote the poor guy to death while wearing the convenient billowy white dress she brought onboard. And she does. Happily. There's not even a crumb of will or even dissent left in her the way we see with the goddamn Weird Sisters who were with him for centuries and actively tried to steal Jonathan from their master***, or even Bloofer Lady Lucy reaching for Art.

Just a pointless fuck you of a death that added nothing.

Followed by Dracula snapping Vampire Girlfriend's neck, double-kills her, and chucks her into the sea while chuckling about how silly it is to think that he would want a companion, ha ha!

...

Yes, I am also staring at the camera The Office-style, thinking about -checks notes- the Weird Sisters, Jonathan, Lucy, a random ass girl in Piccadilly, Mina...

Oh, that Dracula. Such a loner.

And all that leads to the Captain with the rosary--WHICH ISN'T EVEN HIS--and the last few chapters which are just pure padding about Dracula shoving the Demeter to shore. After getting a cutaway scene to Dracula hopping into Lucy's brain somehow to grope her while Mina watches. For reasons.

The book is, in short, pointless.

The OCs are pointless. Them being on the boat is pointless. Nothing they do, nothing the author has the crew or Dracula do, adds literally anything to what was already in the Demeter section of the book. There is no meat here, only voluptuous gristle.

And the thing is! The infuriating thing is! Because this is a Dracula*** story, it is still technically more respectful than the bulk of other writing and media about Dracula, because so much of it is doubly extra-fetished never-read-the-book never-liked-the-book utter garbage.

So I still have to give it 3/5 stars as a Dracula story. 1.5-2 in isolation.

Anyway, I'm going to go re-watch TLVOTD now

[gynandromorph]

You are a sniper tasked with suppressing dissent against Dark Lord of the Universe Jessie Gaylord during a global diplomatic conference. You've been told to shoot anyone with inflammatory visual cues like protest signs or clothes with anti-Jessie messages, anyone who speaks off of the podium, and to shoot them if they express anti-Jessie sentiments even if they are on the podium. However, you are not to shoot Jessie for speaking, and she has brought a guest. Even though she and the guest talk quietly to each other throughout the assembly, you and your fellow snipers intuit that you should not shoot her guest for speaking with her, against what your orders technically were, because your orders ultimately have the goal of preventing Jessie from becoming upset.

During Jessie's speech at the podium, she demands that someone respond to a question she asked, but no one wants to answer her lest they be shot down then and there. She keeps pushing for a response, and says that the snipers won't hurt the person who responds. Someone in the assembly takes the presumed immunity to consequence as an opportunity to shout something extremely anti-Jessie back at her in response.

[eretzyisrael]

by Natan Sharansky

It was into this foul atmosphere that Columbia’s Jewish students wrote their letter. Five hundred of Columbia’s Jewish students declared that they won’t be cowed by the haters, that they reject the attacks against their Jewish identity, and that Zionism is a part of Jewish identity. They called out their haters for the antisemites they are, and the administration of the university for downplaying and mishandling the attacks that target Jews. They flatly rejected attempts to victim-blame the Jews for the hatred that targets them. Most remarkably, they all signed the letter with their full names, proudly and openly, shedding the self-censorship and silence of the doublethinker for the proud stance of the dissident. In the days since then, more and more Jews added their names to this list.

When I was a dissident in the USSR, my friends and I knew well that a revolution can only start when a critical mass of doublethinkers stops being afraid and crosses the line into open dissent. Only when the masses lose their fear and drop the mask of pretense, can they lead their society into a different future. It was true in the USSR, and it is true today: The ideological regime of antisemitism that has entrenched itself in America’s universities for decades will only collapse when enough Jews stop being afraid. It will only collapse if they stop unwillingly aiding it by hiding and self-censoring, and instead speak their truths openly and loudly.

When we were fighting the USSR from within, we estimated that once approximately a fifth of the population will transform from doublethinkers into dissidents, the authorities will no longer be able to contain the spread of free thought. Heartwarmingly, more than a fifth of the Jews of Columbia University have already signed the letter that marks them as dissidents to the reigning ideological regime. I hope that our estimations decades ago about the tipping point from oppression to revolution will prove right in the case of this revolution as well.

The next year will likely be as tough for Jews on campus as this one. Of course, in democratic America there are many tools that can be used to fight antisemitism: going to court, encouraging hearings in Congress, using the press to unmask the dangerous actors who finance the new antisemitic waves, and so forth. But in order to defend your rights, you have to first define and claim them. Until America’s Jewish students publicly claim their right to their Jewish and Zionist identity, they will continue to fight at a disadvantage.

However, if the Jewish students of Cornell, Stanford, Harvard, and the other campuses will join Columbia’s Jews in their public statement, they stand a chance to do more than stand up for their own truths—they stand a real chance to revolutionize the campuses, defeat the antisemitic forces that have occupied them, and win the battle for American Jewry’s future.

Dear Jewish students of America, today, you are on the front line. The future of American Jewry, and maybe even America itself, is in your hands. Be brave.

[mutual-vigilance]

The Traveller and the Tyrant

This is my honest review and critique of the Witness's characterisation. I would ask you to "enjoy", but, considering its themes and the fact that it is over 3,700 words long, perhaps a better phrase would be: "you have been warned."

When I loaded into Excision last week, I was immediately struck by the opening cutscene’s resemblance to the final, climactic battle of The Lord of the Rings, where the steadfast commander of humanity gave a rousing speech to his allied troops before bravely charging forward into the shambling mass of deformed, mutated enemy foot-soldiers, all under the shadow of a monolithic tower, the abode of the ultimate villain of the story. This was nearly enough to make me tune out, and, alas, what followed was not much better.

I have myriad complaints about the Witness’s portrayal in Destiny, and this cinematic is as good a place as any to begin. I do not think the introduction to Excision was fitting for the end of the Light and Darkness saga. Throughout the series, we have fought off a number of escalating threats, beginning with opportunistic Eliksni scavengers, and ending with a being that can end the universe itself. I do not think that a horde of Scorn ought to be the best this being can come up with for its final stand. I would have preferred to see it bend reality, drag us into the arm-tunnel shown in the trailer, shatter an allied warship on the spot, do anything, anything other than tread the worn war-paths of Sauron and his hundreds of imitators in various works of fantasy. First, because this is science fantasy after all, and second, because many of those themes are deeply rooted in xenophobia, unfitting for our current day and age.

The visual designs of the Witness itself and its precursors draw heavily from the historical and present cultures of southwest Asia and north Africa. Their monumental structures of stone evoke the architecture of the region. Their tetrahedral ships remind one of the Egyptian pyramids, and their murals, of the intricate paintings in buried tombs. They are said to hail from the sandy desert. The precursor aliens covered their heads and sometimes entire bodies in cloth; the concept art clearly contains sketches based on humans who dress this way, in burqas; and even the Witness is clad in a long, black robe that hides its lower face, showing only its dark, single brow and dark eyes. I could go on, but I believe I have said enough to back up my next statement: It was not a wise decision to base this particular sci-fi faction on the peoples of the Levant.

The Witness’s army of Scorn is portrayed as a savage horde, in stark contrast to humanity and our allies. The Scorn don’t even have guns. They have crossbows and torches, yet they are a deadly threat to our shining ships. We are told that our enemy is magnitudes more powerful than us, but we are shown that its troops hail from the Bronze Age. Why is the Witness not allowed to demonstrate its technological or paracausal superiority? We are told that it is made of many people, but it is single-minded, ruthless, and its cruelty is unmatched. In fact, its constituent minds are not even slaves; they literally do not have individuality until they dissent, and any dissent is, of course, summarily suppressed. These characteristics – the savagery or “backwardness”, the collectivism and despotism – are common Orientalist stereotypes. And to top it all off, the Witness is driven purely by religious fanaticism. Its robed, veiled selves are ontologically evil and irredeemable, except in death, naturally. I note that Savathûn gets a pass, decked out as she and her throne world are in Gothic imagery and ball gowns, and roll my eyes. And in the game, our characters speak of the Witness as a poison, a disease. A corrupter of all that is good. A foreign snake in our Traveller’s garden. There is concept art of that. Appalling. 

I have always known that Destiny is a game made by and for Americans, or the West in general. I was even recently reminded of this by the way that Bungie hiked up the price of The Final Shape expansion for many non-USD currencies, but I still held hope for a satisfactory conclusion. I was too optimistic. It appears that even in this modern tale, the tired tropes that have plagued genre fiction since genre fiction existed are inescapable. I saw the Witness’s multi-armed form (reminding me immediately of Guanyin and perhaps others of Shiva) coming from a long way off, and I still laughed when I first finished Iconoclasm. It was like finding myself situated in that old drawing depicting the Christian nations of Europe as a group of humans, arming themselves against the distant, threatening silhouette of... the Buddha. An image published in 1895. Maybe a being with a thousand arms is threatening, who knows, but I’ve seen too many sticks of incense burnt before her altar to be afraid or awed. Buddhist villains are rare in fiction, and there was some potential in contrasting the Witness’s concept of the world as made of suffering with similar ideas in Buddhism, but the resemblance, in the end, was used for superficial, visual shock value. Sigh.

So then I went ahead anyway, defending the City upon the Hill (ringed with spears) against Satan, via feats of marksmanship and acrobatics through five exciting encounters, riffling through a diary that I picked up in the Monolith to try and learn more about my enemy. If I knew my enemy, and knew myself, then I could potentially complete Salvation’s Edge in a reasonable time-frame! Or not. The raid took my team and me a month and a half. Probably because the lore left me more confused about my enemy than I was at the start.

We are told that the Witness comprised a multitude when it first entered the Traveller, since people were still actively being cut out of it shortly thereafter. And then, by the end of Excision, the game implies that the multitude is gone, and only a single consciousness remains, which we kill with little fanfare (when we could’ve used a 2-minute cutscene. In my completely unbiased opinion). 

Where did the many go? Did they all become dissenters? How? Why?

It is possible that, like the lower-case gardener described in page 2 of the raid's lorebook, all of the constituent minds grew frustrated with being unable to achieve perfection even with the Traveller’s Light, abandoned their original goal of imposing the Final Shape upon the universe, and were sealed off into statues one by one until only the last remained. But this would imply that we, the player, had little to do with the Witness’s downfall, that it imploded from its own loss of faith. Hardly a triumphant victory for us to brag about when we go home, and it comes with the “bonus” moral that mortals should not aspire to godhood because such attempts are doomed to failure. This explanation is too dull for me to accept.

The alternative, then, is that we did do something to cause the constituent minds to defect en masse. But I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what. Remember, we killed the dissenters to weaken the Witness. Why would committing murder make other people dissent, people that are one hundred percent committed to the Witness’s goal? I imagine myself as a sailor on a warship in the heat of battle, or a member of a raid-race team that has been awake for 47 hours straight. I see the enemy ship fire at me. I see the 48-hour deadline drawing closer and closer. What could possibly make me turn against my own crew, sabotage my own team? Yes, it could be because my captain has been yelling at me and I am completely fed up with them and I would rather die than suffer them for another minute, but that is also either a preexisting weakness that we merely exploit, or a stress fracture within the Witness that is caused by destroying everything and everyone it throws in our way, not by convincing these constituent minds that our philosophy and goals are better than theirs. Yes, this is the genre of game where shooting and slashing solves all problems, but come on. It could’ve been different.

On page 4 of The Rubicon, the raid’s lorebook, we learn of a previous occasion upon which the Witness was nearly defeated. Its adversary offered it peace, but the Witness struck it down. The dissenter narrating this story was not shocked into individuality by the betrayal, but by the fact that the thing they created to be literally single-minded in its pursuit of the Final Shape... is single-minded in its pursuit of the Final Shape? And then, more pertinently, the dissenter dismisses any notion that the Witness could be changed, and begs us little lights to not hesitate when we are the ones holding the knife to its throat.

This dissenter, while earnest, is wrong. The death of the adversary did change the Witness. It dislodged one mind from the collective, did it not?

So imagine, if you will. 

We encounter the dissenters. We listen to their story. They beg us to destroy them to weaken the Witness. They desired to be exonerated in death, to be redeemed, to be saved by us and the paracausal entity behind us. 

And we refuse.

We are given a blade, but we strike the statues with the hilt instead, cracking the stone. We pull their living flesh – made of what, we do not know, but it is living – from the rubble and we spirit them away to the camps we’ve made. We sit them by the fire and we protect them from retribution and, though these nocturnal beings do not see very well in the Light, the Witness sees, and it knows. It may seethe at how we escape its clutches time after time, it may sneer that we are making everything harder for ourselves, that we forget the ultimate goal is survival, but, through our selflessness and our seemingly endless capacity to forgive, we stir up hope within the multitude that what awaits them could be better than death, than even finality. They begin to remember the ancient enemies that once offered them mercy, and they are confronted by a new enemy who, for the first time, uniting Light and Darkness, has the power to defend such a truce. Slowly, they realise that they do not want to be our enemy. They are cast off. We save every person we can. And in the end, together with all our allies, we confront those vicious minds that remain.

But page number 4 shut that down, and all I’m left with is my fireteam member’s gripe that wow, this is just like how the United States deals with uppity foreign countries. It doesn’t really attempt to show that it is better, but prefers to fund dissident groups within the enemy state until it collapses, and everyone there is worse off. Which is harsh, but I can understand my friend’s position, since I have related gripes of my own. You see, the campaign forced me to protect the Traveller, the very model of a foreign interventionist, and I cannot overstate how much I resent that.

I started to become interested in Destiny’s lore after seeing some amazing fanart. Through copious amounts of research, I came to the conclusion that the Traveller is a downright bastard. If you haven’t read Shattered Suns, Rhulk’s backstory, you should. But below is a summary of what Rhulk said about his society as he sat on the Witness’s therapy couch, looking directly into the camera:

“Long ago, my planet, Lubrae, was inhabited by clans of hunter-gatherers. One day, the Traveller came and provided us with resources that helped us survive the dangerous flora and fauna of the forest where we lived. (It may have also genetically modified his people, if his ‘we evolved’ phrasing is to be taken at face value.) People were of two minds about how to continue after that. Some wanted to take advantage of these resources and settle down in a well-protected City. Others preferred to stay in the forest, and live like how they did before. As a result, they fought, and they were still fighting by the time I was born. I grew up watching the better-fed, better-armed City people murder members of my forest-dwelling clan on sight.”

His clan, Rhulk explained, was egalitarian, and relied on one another for safety. The Traveller’s uplifting of his species changed all of that. Lubraeans were able to manufacture Glaives and other tools to better protect themselves against the wildlife. The newly-introduced technology shifted their very conception of safety from the clan to the Glaive, from their fellow Lubraeans to objects that could be gathered into one City, be cordoned off, monopolised, hoarded, controlled. In that City, they invented oligarchy, soldiering as a profession, and the death penalty. They started to march troops into the forest, trying to rid it of its original inhabitants.

I have read books and reports on modern hunter-gatherer societies, and all of them conclude that first contact, if unavoidable, should be made with extreme caution. To quote the 2013 IWGIA report on indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation and initial contact:

“[When we make initial contact,] what we are actually doing is forming the spearhead of a complex, cold and determined society that does not excuse adversaries with inferior technology. We are invading the lands they live on without being invited, without their agreement. We are introducing needs they have never had. We are destroying extremely rich social organisations. We are taking their peace and tranquillity away from them. We are launching them into a different, cruel and hard world. Often, we are leading them to their death.”

I do not like how the narrative of Destiny persistently exonerates the Traveller. At times, a character will rail vaguely against the “chaos” it causes, and the most frequent complaint we hear about it is that it left their species too soon. Rhulk was, to my knowledge, the only one to see the Traveller come to his world, distribute its technology among his people, dump a pile of societal problems into their laps as a result, saunter off without so much as a word, and subsequently come to the conclusion that Lubrae never needed the Traveller in the first place. And he was correct; it never did. I hope it is abundantly clear that if humans were to ever encounter an alien planet inhabited by hunter-gatherers who are themselves hunted by predators, our first course of action should not be to hand out shotguns left and right.

But what if we granted them different technology, such as high-yield crops? If human history is anything to go by, they would go on to invent chattel slavery. Agriculture increased the efficiency of food production, but humans, instead of distributing the labour evenly, have universally chosen to create an artificial underclass, and then force them to perform the majority of the labour. This was true in 2000 BC, and it remains true today. The fact of the matter is, societal issues can be much, much more difficult to solve than technological ones. The Traveller tripled human lifespan? So what? Humanity has already doubled it on our own, but we’re still struggling with concepts like “women deserve rights.”

Some might say that it does not matter, because those aliens would have invented all these things sooner or later, both the good and the bad; that the Traveller merely eased their transition into a prosperous future. To which I would respond: it does matter. They must be allowed to choose their fate. At the very least, they deserve an answer for why their prayers for safety and sustenance were answered in this ham-fisted manner. We are told that the Traveller wants to grant us freedom, but all it does is run roughshod over peoples’ right to self-determination. Look at what it did to the Witness’s homeworld. It terraformed an environment that sapient beings were already living in. Were the precursors not already adapted to the dry environment, physically and culturally? What is the purpose of making a forest sprout from the sand? Is it for the benefit of the nomads of the desert, or is it to reinforce the audience’s preconception of how utopia should look? Why does the game’s narrative re-iterate that the precursors ceaselessly sought answers from the Traveller, framing them as greedy, entitled, and unsatisfied with the “blessings” bestowed upon them? If I were a precursor, I would have questions too: what was wrong with the way I lived before? Why do you get to decide how I ought to live? Is walking away even an option at this point? Paradise is a prison when you cannot leave. Lubrae’s Wanderers tried, but they could not escape the new material conditions that the Light had imposed upon them.

Humans have had our share of prophets, many associated with millennia of internecine warfare. Now imagine if God, literal God, showed up in the desert one day, and stuck around until we achieved interstellar flight. The Traveller destroyed the precursors. We’re the unfortunate ones who have to deal with the consequences of its actions, if not its words. Destiny’s narrative insists that because the Traveller was silent, it is not responsible for what befell the precursors. That is untrue. Silent or not, the damage was done. The Traveller touched world after world, sending their peoples into crisis after crisis, and all the lore says on the subject is how much the Traveller cares about all of them. Truly. It can care all it likes, as long as it stops wielding the weapon of mass destruction strapped to its belly. Come here. Hand over the beam.

My opinion may sound extraordinary, but I assure you it is not. The following are some translated user comments, taken from the most-viewed version of the Witness origin cutscene from the Season of the Deep uploaded on Bilibili (video ID BV1Jm4y1t7cn):

“I feel that Traveller was messing around with the entire universe. In order to stop it, the Witness's people discovered the Veil and the Darkness, and tried to stop the Traveller from flooding everyone with its ‘kindness’. This caused the Traveller to embark on a foolish journey, drawing even more species into a cosmic war, just so it can continue to spread its so-called grace.”

“In summary: the Traveller tosses technology everywhere to all species, and then every species wants to expand their territory. It’s just setting fires everywhere.”

“I think the narrative may end up depicting the Traveller as a neutral power, or even close to a villain. After all, its existence has disrupted the fates of many species in the universe. No matter its original intentions, its unilateral interference is not a good thing. I don’t know how the plot will resolve; whether Light and Darkness will no longer continue to interfere in the universe, or whether the Darkness (Veil) will show its true face after the Witness is defeated…”

I am not cherry-picking. These are all highly-rated comments. You can go see for yourself. It’s fascinating that reactions like these are almost completely absent from the Anglophone fandom. I only reached my own opinion on the Traveller after extensive research, yet these fans on Bilibili took one look at that cutscene, and instinctively decided that our war is the Traveller’s fault. A vast Pacific lies between the writers of Destiny, and the messaging these players saw in its story. The game insists that the Traveller is innocent, that it always had good intentions; these fans say that intentions don’t matter when its actions have been the ruin of so many. Self-determination is more precious than any paradise a foreign saviour can grant.

On page 5 of The Rubicon, we see that the precursors learned well from their god. They began to journey among the stars, and render aid unto the other species they encountered. They did one better than the Traveller, in fact, as it appears that they actually bothered to ask those species beforehand why they may or may not desire aid, rather than park their ships in their skies and skip straight to the terraforming. Unfortunately, after too many refusals, the precursors decided to go to an even further extreme than their god. They would interfere in the life of every being in existence, all at once, forcing them to exist in an eternal, perfect moment. And unlike the Traveller, they would tell everyone exactly what was coming. The Final Shape.

Early on in the eponymous expansion, we discovered that the afterlife exists. Cayde-6 was perfectly aware and conscious after his death, suspended in a bright and comforting forever alongside his Ghost, Sundance. He enjoyed the experience, and disliked being resurrected yet again. This raises an incredible number of questions, but the thing that stood out to me the most was how familiar it sounded. How much it resembled what the Witness promised. For Zavala to be reunited with Hakim. For Crow to be reunited with Amanda. For Ikora to find peace in victory. And for us to…

I do not think the Witness was lying when it offered all of those things. It was not lying when it gave each of its disciples a different vision of its ultimate goal. Whether it was capable of carrying through is one thing, but whether it was honest is another, and I believe it was honest. Its Final Shape is a natural extension of what Guardians receive in death. Whereas Guardians are granted a peaceful eternity with their Ghost, the Witness would try to simultaneously grant every sapient creature an end in kind, tailored to their individual desires. That is not to say, I agree with its end. The Witness was a tyrant as much as the Traveller is a bastard, especially since it threatened to punish people for eternity, too, out of nothing but the pettiness in its bitter heart. Yes, I concur, I am a pawn of the light, but I will not suffer to be your pawn, either.

What I wanted to say after that, rebuking its offer to make me into a disciple, is: “I will join you, if you let me save you.”

[istumpysk]

So new ish to the tumblr side of ASOIAF, why do you hate Dany so much?

I mean no disrespect anon, but I always laugh when someone asks me why I don't like the villain-coded character.

Anyway, why do I hate Daenerys? Let's see,

Her aspirations, and intentions

That whole oppression thing she's got going on

Her abuse of power

The human rights violations

The exploitation of the slaves she "freed"

The incompetence

The hypocrisy

Her family, and the admiration she demonstrates towards them

The Daenerys Targaryen propaganda machine, happening in-universe and out

Her constantly speaking in a manner that appears to be harmless, gentle, and naive, in order to intentionally hide her true nature

The casual violence and cruelty

Her xenophobic behavior towards her subjects who dare to express any form of dissent or disapproval

The pathetic fawning over despicable men, while knowing they're despicable men

Her entire retinue (not including the slaves she's enslaved)

Annoying, grating

Her destructive reptilian companions, and her unwavering affection and devotion towards them

Kind of an idiot

Hates trees

I could probably keep going.

Edit: "Then how come you like Cersei?"

Because she unapologetically owns it.

[miasudare]

Possession?

So, by cotl's official twitter accounts words ''PlayStation showed spoilers'' for the new update. This is the post.

After here are spoilers and theory

So in the video (and in the trailer for the unholy alliance) , there are noticeably new decorations. Bamboo walls, new lanterns, a baby bed? crib? Knucklebones table, Pagodas (asian temples ig)

Then there's a new follower form: Panda, seemed to be taking notes in the video.

There's also new follower actions. Followers now seem to free their friends from prisons, run away from the cult for no reason (there wasn't a dissenting symbol) and get POSSESSED by the purple crown.

While under control, the followers act like zombies. Their eyes glow purple, sclera black. It might not be connected but judging by the elephant that seemed to be possessed earlier, it tires the followers. Now: What does this mean?

Purple crown belongs to the Goat. Tho it is told that Goat and Lamb are the same, Lamb never done something like this (not counting sin). Goat and Lamb never could be the same. There's no such thing as ''I'm exactly you, but my appearance is a lil different''. No. That's dumb. If you watched any kind of media about alternative universes (or been in the undertale fandom lol) you'd know that for one to be alternative, ''a variant'', they need to have SPECIFIC differences. Yes, Lamb and Goat are sharing roles but they are NOT the same person.

Now in the trailer, it does seem like an another lamb became the goat. But it's just cinematic stuff don't worry. It was just the goat pulling himself up. After being pulled up, the goat immediately goes to kill the first thing they see. Just pushing the lamb aside with zero care. Also in gameplay moment, Goat is summoned by Lamb in Silk Cradle. Maybe by summoning or because they share crown powers, Goat's eyes are red. Also, the weapons are red too, but I assume those won't be remaining and they'll give Goat new assets.

Possession in cult of the lamb has been seen. Sozo by the mushroom, the relics by Chemach, Sinned followers by sin, Lamb by Mystic Seller/Bishops, Mini bosses by the Bishops, Our followers against us by Shamura. Although, it is known that Shamura themselves are also controlled by the Purple crown

Unlike Chemach's crown, Shamura's crown only has one eye like the other Bishops'. I believe that Chemach's crown possesses other crowns, which I explained down in the 3rd paragraph.

The crowns are known to choose their bearers. In my previous theory, I talked about Shamura being one of the first crown bearers and one of the oldest gods. Maybe because of this, the crown accepted Shamura as a part of itself, impaling deep into their brain. Maybe this process was painful, traumatizing even. If you noticed, Shamura are the only bishop that NEVER blinks (Except in their boss battle). Their eyes are also the only ones that shake in the idle animation. Imagine having something that has roots deep in your head, messing with your decisions.

So, it is clear that Purple crown does in fact has the power to control minds. Shamura, the possessed followers, Witnesses maybe (considering they were the first believers of the old faith and worked under the purple crown). This also creates an opposites attract situation with the red crown. Narinder, who wanted free will. Red crown, which gives you the same free will of sinning. Then Shamura, who is against the change, who finds this as ''betrayal''. The purple crown, which treats the bearer as a host and leaves no free will in return.

Also as we can see, two crowns can combine. Double the power of a god. Chemach, who already seems to have 3, can turn followers to objects (relics). First question would be ''Who's ass she killed?'' and the second would be ''So what can 2 do?''

Red crown:

Controls ones life: like resurrections, ascensions

Can shape shift into weapons

Morphs to sin

Speaks

There's also an unused ''Crown Possess'', which was probably scrapped due to this power being given to the Purple crown.

Purple crown:

Controls minds, possesses

Can shape shift into weapons

Grows roots

Less expressive (Both Blue and Purple crown don't blink)

Controls the bearer

When you cross these two together:

✨Magenta Crown✨ you get. I don't really think there's more to say that it just has both a bit of the red and purple abilities.

During the video, the followers seem to walk towards the lamb, as if they are after him. They don't do anything to the goat. So, maybe Goat is a backstabber. In the name off ''alliance'' they plan to take our cult. Who knows? Maybe the goat ripped the crown off of the bearer's skull (which should be Narinder if the Goat is allegedly a variant of Lamb) with bare hands.

Or, with a more positive way, maybe the goat can control the mind of followers to help us make sure that they are in line ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Check my Witness Theory and Full story too!

[queenvhagar]

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTNsv69to/

Comments:

[Fr like look at the show theyve put aegon on the throne not because he’s rightful but because otto and alicent wants power if they rlly think aegon should be king why didnt they taught him to be one

And now when alicent and otto realized that they have no power over aegon they started to turn their backs on him? Like girl be fr you put him there]

[Also people are OBSESSED with saying Aegon is ‘heir by law’ when Widow’s Law is like right there and the succession is customary, not law as well as the council of 101 not actually passing a law

But a law proposed by a women to protect women will always be overlooked by male tradition 🙄]

[This is facts also why are we adhering the traditions of a misogynist fictional society. I go with what's right. and that's rhaenyra as named heir.]

[Also in a monarchy like the Targ’s the King’s word IS law. Tradition doesn’t matter when the King speaks. The King made her Heir, the Lord’s swore their fealty which makes her the rightful queen]

[I cant when people started to bring up law like tf😭😭😭 yeah Westeros is sexist we get it thats the point of the story]

[While it is true that the monarchy is bad and screws over everyone, Rhaenyra is reacting to bad things that have happened to her. We’re not cheering for her because we think she’s can do no wrong,

We’re cheering for her because she’s standing up for herself and trying to get back at those who wronged her just like so many men in that world and ours have without the same level of backlash]

[Your a baby talking about misogyny, the only counter argument you need is that in every tradition the only thing that matters is the named heir , long live the queen]

[People also cite the succession laws that had been in place for 1000s of years for lords, forgetting those laws don’t apply to the 100 year old iron throne😭😭]

I’m afraid if it weren’t for your posts, I’d be agreeing 😕

Happy to have shown the light of truth 🙏

Essentially this all breaks down to not understanding how people in-universe react to things and inserting modern viewpoints into the show where they have no place.

Like obviously misogyny is bad. But it is so ingrained into medieval society that everyone is a misogynist and acts as such. Every single character and all systems of power are influenced by it. That is why Rhaenyra would have always had issues succeeding her father and why either she and Viserys needed to make moves to try to preempt that to avoid bloodshed or Viserys should have named another heir. The system is against women, so as long as the king insists on a woman inheriting over a man with no precedent in Westeros to back it up and the king's trueborn sons right there as alternatives, the Blacks would have to take out the Green to secure their rule, and the Greens knew this. This is the crux of the succession issue. Crowing Aegon was the Greens making a move to ensure their survival and then offering terms to the Blacks to try to prevent war if possible (though considering the rivalry between the factions it was inevitable).

Westeros is not an absolute monarchy and monarchs are beholden to the wishes of lords of great houses and the traditions and customs everyone lives by, so no the king's word is not law. Because the Targaryens conquered a people whose traditions and customs existed for thousands of years, they learned they have to shape their rule to accommodate them to avoid dissent (see for example the uprising of the Faith under Aenys I as well as Aegon I deciding on how he would shape rule of the Seven Kingdoms from the Iron Throne).

Unfortunately the adaptation has failed fans unfamiliar with all of this in how they present a one-sided morality tale when there was none in the original story. Complexity and in-universe considerations have been largely lost in favor of shaping the show into a specific image they want it to be.

[kineticpenguin]

Once dreamed of as a galactic empire built on scientific understanding and secular thought, the millennia following the Emperor’s death instead saw a slow decay into mysticism, madness and theocratic fascism, with entire planets given over to religious worship of the now-God-Emperor’s corpse, and any attempt at scientific advancement punishable by death. At the top of this rotting pile perch the High Lords of Terra, who maintain the Imperial Creed in His name through iron-fisted control and the enthusiastic application of genocide. They select only the most loyal recruits to rise through the ranks of the power structure, resulting in iterative, stagnant dilution and a violent aversion to outside threats — a blind adherence to dogma and a refusal to confront the reality of what they have become condemning them to a grim future indeed.

After nearly 40 years of trying to steer their flagship Warhammer 40,000 battle-barge towards Profitus Maxima, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that Games Workshop has fallen into the same downward spiral of ideological rot. Each new edition of the game feels increasingly recursive and more corporate than the one before, with all nuance carefully buffed out in order to deliver the most bombastic, shallow ‘grimdark’ caricatures possible. Challenging ideas and radical thought are strongly discouraged, with dissenters purged from their employment, and corporate gags slapped over the mouths of those who would speak out against oppression and tyranny. Indeed, so thoroughly dead is the idea of Warhammer 40,000 as “satire” that the completely fictional in-universe timeline itself is not safe, with entire books being rewritten and republished in order to ensure a bulletproof internal chronology of a setting which its creator cautioned that we “should not take too seriously”. 

[3pirouette]

I will eventually clean this up and post to AO3, but I’m bordering on being late for work because of this ficlet.

I think we all need this right now.

Fic: Tomorrow starts the work. (1/1) Steggy

You can see this as either a part of my Dissents Speak or Seven if we’re lucky Universes…

~*~

It was a devastating blow.

Sitting, watching the results come in.

Watching each state turn red.

“Red Mirage, blue wave,” Steve muttered to himself as he paced between phone calls and texts, over and over for hours on end, managing the flow of information between Peggy and the outside world.

“It’s not coming,” she finally conceded, holding back tears.

“It’s still-“

“No,” she finally interrupted him, sniffing back her emotion. “No. It’s not coming.” Peggy stood, pulling at her shirt and reaching for her jacket. “I’ll have to meet with everyone, put together a speech.”

”I don’t understand how,” he said softly, looking between her and the screen, devastated and forlorn and confused. “We worked so hard, we told the truth, we showed everyone what the difference was…”

”And they weren’t ready,” Peggy said softly, sadly, as she reached for him, entwining her fingers in his. “So may people are, but not enough understood what was at stake.”

”What… what do we do?” He stammered, clutching her hand tight.

She looks at the TV, muted, with the prediction blaring in bold letters across the banner at the bottom: they’ve lost. It’s undeniable. “We try to sleep. We concede gracefully.”

Peggy smiles at him, reaching up and letting her hand run over his cheek. “You never even considered the possibility, did you, darling?”

Steve shakes his head. “I don’t understand how…”

She sighs, full of love for the man before her, his optimism and his passion, and for the loss they’ve both now suffered. For the loss so many have suffered.

“Neither do I,” she reminds him gently, “but I need you to.” She can only smile at his quizzical look. “Tonight we can be sad, but tomorrow starts the work. This was an election, not a sentencing. Nothing is written in stone. For every policy, for every bill, for every ideaology he puts forward, we need to be there, ready to fight for what we know everyone deserves.”

He shakes his head, astounded at her strength. “I’m just- I’m so fucking tired, Peg…”

”Aren’t we all, darling?” She can’t keep the bone deep weariness out of her voice. “But we carry on, because that’s what we do. We carry on, because someone needs to fight, to educate, to do. The more we do, the more others will, too. If we stand still, if we get bogged down by this defeat, nothing will change. We will create that destiny for ourselves. Tomorrow is still unknown, and I’m going to do damn well everything in my power to make sure it isn’t the outcome I’m afraid of.”

He pulls her into his arms, holding her tightly. “You’re right.”

She laughs, even if a tear does escape her eyes. “Of course I’m right, darling.”

”Tomorrow starts the work,” he affirms, stepping back and running his thumb over her cheek, wiping away her single errant tear.

She smiles up at him, tinged with fear and loss, but full of the hope she never gives up on, “Tomorrow starts the work.”

[hero-israel]

do you think there can be a reconciliation between being a Marxist or leftist and also not hating Israel? I use to feel so safe in leftist spaces, and while I don’t anymore I miss that connection. I still agree with the majority of my politics and I am sympathetic to socialism/communism. But I don’t think there’s space for me to do so or if I am doing a disservice to the Jewish people (I’m not Jewish or Israeli) by “siding” with an obvious anti Jewish group. Or would my position as a leftie who supports Israel strengthen my argument ? I’ve been told my support for Israel as a non Jew is very important, and I’m wondering if the same is applied here. I don’t think the crazy people who are anti Israel will change their minds, but will it be worth it ? Or am I wasting my time even putting myself in these spaces. What would be wise for me to do? Completely distance myself from the left and stick w holding my same views, or say I’m a leftie Israel supporter?

That is a very good question!

If there is any way for you to square the circle of being a pro-Israel Leftist, that would be quite helpful; I assure you there are many Jews who are "naturally" left-wing / Marxist but can't bear to engage because of the prominent antisemitism within those movements. There was a huge, ugly crack-up about this within the DSA, and another in the pages of Dissent Magazine and "Jewish" Currents. Perhaps seeing someone else speak up in that regard would encourage them. JVP is universally understood to be anti-Israel and antisemitic - they are a lost cause - but maybe the DSA could be steered back towards a humanitarian approach? Maybe just a sub-branch of them? Just a thought; please don't put yourself at risk. The best way you can be an advocate for Jewish people is to be an advocate for Jewish people - which is different from opening yourself up to fights from all sides.

Perhaps search up any involvement with your preferred issues among members of left-wing Zionist groups like Hashomer Hatzair, Habonim Dror, or ARZA. You might actually fit in better with the Israeli Meretz political party, but I doubt there are opportunities to get involved with it in America. EDIT: And certainly check out A Land For All!

I myself have never disagreed with Chuck Schumer about anything, so I'm not the best source on where to participate in truly left-wing or socialist groups. Would certainly appreciate reader input on this.

No matter what your decision - thank you for standing up for us!

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Prem Thakker at Zeteo News:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D) is being accused of antisemitism by elected officials and mainstream journalists for saying something she never said. 

Here’s how it happened:

Sept. 12: Earlier this month, the Michigan lawmaker called out her state’s Democratic attorney general, Dana Nessel, for announcing charges against 11 pro-Palestine protesters at the University of Michigan. “Instead of getting justice, not one criminal charge in the Flint Water Crisis, you're going to spend time in trying to use the power of your office to silence people's First Amendment right,” Tlaib said during a Black-Palestine solidarity panel, moderated by Zeteo’s Mehdi Hasan.

Sept. 13: “This is a move that’s going to set a precedent, and it’s unfortunate that a Democrat made that move,” Tlaib elaborated in an interview with the Detroit Metro Times. “You would expect that from a Republican, but not a Democrat, and it’s really unfortunate.” ”We’ve had the right to dissent, the right to protest,” she added. “We’ve done it for climate, the immigrant rights movement, for Black lives, and even around issues of injustice among water shutoffs. But it seems that the attorney general decided if the issue was Palestine, she was going to treat it differently, and that alone speaks volumes about possible biases within the agency she runs.”  Nessel’s prosecutions were also criticized by groups including Michigan’s ACLU chapter. Sept. 20: Days later, Tlaib was the target of a racist editorial cartoon that implied she was part of Hezbollah. The cartoon depicted the only Palestinian member of Congress saying “Odd. My pager just exploded,” in reference to the Israeli military terrorist attacks on Lebanon.

[...]

Sometime Tuesday, Jewish Insider edited the original story, without adding a correction or clarification. “Tlaib has also claimed that Nessel is only charging the protesters because she’s Jewish” became “Tlaib has also suggested that Nessel is only charging the protesters because she’s Jewish.” 

Of course, this manufactured lie about Tlaib has wholly obscured that Tlaib was victim to a racist cartoon donning the pages of publications like the National Review; that she had actually begun garnering support and sympathy from her colleagues; and that Tlaib’s “original sin” was speaking out in defense of students protesting their tuition supporting a US-funded genocidal campaign in Palestine. Tlaib’s original remarks criticizing Nessel focused on the prosecution of pro-Palestine protestors, critiques shared by advocacy groups, including the Michigan chapter of the ACLU. Most of the charges are against students, including Jewish students, who refused to vacate a campus encampment after police ordered them to leave as they demanded the school divest from “weapons manufacturers and war profiteers complicit in the genocide in Palestine.” The arrests came as police allegedly used batons, and “Deep Freeze,” self-described as the “most intense, incapacitating agent available today,” to arrest the students.

Prem Thakker writes in Zeteo News debunking the ridiculous accusation that Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) is “antisemitic” because she criticized AG Dana Nessel (D) for prosecuting pro-Palestinian protesters.

[marvelmusing]

In Another Life

Part Nine

Pairing: Aleksander Morozova x Alternate Universe!Reader

Summary: After a dramatic arrival into West Ravka, your group travels to Os Kervo, and you recruit a pirate privateer to join you in the search for the sea whip.

Warnings: canon level violence.

My Masterlist • Series Masterlist • Next Part

With the passengers on the skiff still reeling from Aleksander’s manipulation of the Fold, you’re provided with the opportunity to carry out the next stage in your plan.

Whilst no one is looking, Aleksander bends the shadows around you in an attempt to conceal you from vision.

Glancing down at yourself, you don’t notice any difference. Aleksander is still looking at you, and it’s only when Alina moves closer, asking him where you had gone, that you realise he had succeeded. You’re invisible.

Aleksander must still be able to see you, as his eyes still find yours whilst you’re cloaked in his shadows. Giving him a small nod, you move to the edge of the skiff.

Once Zoya brings the skiff to a stop at the docks, you slide away unnoticed by anyone but Aleksander.

It’s easy enough to weave your way through the crowd, though it’s difficult to remember that people can’t see you. There’s a few instances in which someone almost barrels right into you, as people move around frantically.

You can’t imagine how frightening it must have been, seeing the Fold rushing towards you, running away even though you know there would be no chance of you outrunning such a monstrosity.

A shiver runs through you, as you realise that Novokribirsk is still standing because of you. If the story had unfolded as it should have, this entire town would be consumed by darkness, it’s people torn apart by the volcra.

It doesn’t take you long to find General Zlatan. His brows are furrowed as he speaks with some rather unnerved looking First Army officers. From the looks of it, they seem rather reluctant to carry out whatever Zlatan wants them to do.

They stay at the edge of the docks, as Zlatan straightens himself and moves along the wooden structure towards Aleksander as he steps off the skiff.

You trail close behind Zlatan, unseen. A few dignitaries that had been on the skiff breeze by the General, followed by Ivan and Fedoyr, as well as some other passengers.

“General Kirigan.” Zlatan calls out in greeting, to which Aleksander nods with feigned politeness.

“Zlatan.”

“That was quite the entrance.”

Zlatan’s fingers are fidgeting with the grip of the sword that hangs at his side. Aleksander’s display of power has clearly shaken the First Army General.

Then he straightens, evidently seizing some courage, and grasps at his sword. Only for you to get to him first.

His sword is half unsheathed as you seize a fistful of his hair, yanking his head back as you press your knife into his side, right against the artery, like Fedoyr had showed you.

Aleksander loosens his hold on the shadows surrounding you.

“I wouldn’t do that, if I were you.” You warn Zlatan in a low voice.

His eyes are wide and startled at the sight of you, seemingly appearing out of nowhere. You press your knife harder against his side when he attempts to struggle.

Glancing over at Aleksander, you see him nod his head, and you release Zlatan, shoving him backwards hard, where Fedoyr waits to grab him. From the grimace on Zlatan’s face, you can tell that Ivan also has a hold on his heart.

“Take him to the town’s holding cells.” Aleksander orders them.

“You have nothing on me, Kirigan.” Zlatan spits out angrily, but you can see the fear in his eyes.

“Don’t I?” Aleksander retorts calmly, raising a brow at the increasingly frantic looking Zlatan. “Your acquaintance, Arken Visser, sends his regards.”

“I don’t know what you’re talking about.” Zlatan protests. “Let me go.”

His dissent soon falters as Ivan and Fedoyr drag him through the crowd, away into the town. First Army officers stand aside, though most of them are too captivated by Alina to even notice their distressed General.

A few people are kneeling, while others raise their arms in thanks to the saints. All around you, whispers of prayer and piety rise from the people. All for one person.

Sankta Alina.

»»---------------------►

Os Kervo smells of the sea.

West Ravka is smaller than East Ravka, so the journey to the country’s port city is quicker than riding from Os Alta to Kribirsk, which you’re thankful for.

The boarding house that you’ve secured for the length of your stay is in a quieter area of the city, and your room has a view of the sea. As you’re settling in, you open up your window to hear the distant sound of waves lapping at the shore, and gulls soaring above.

“I know we’re here on a mission. Not for fun.” You say lightly, as Aleksander sits writing at the desk in your room. He lifts his head, eyes narrowing faintly at your tone.

“But?”

“But, there’s a patch of beach a little further down the coast.” You fiddle with one of his pencils, twirling it between your fingers. “Alina’s never seen the True Sea.”

“This isn’t another ploy to bring myself and Alina closer together?” You shake your head, looking down a little sheepishly.

“When I was younger, there wasn’t a summer that went by without a visit to the beach and… well I miss it.”

He studies your face for a long moment, considering your words as he places his pen down and folds his hands together.

“Will tomorrow afternoon suffice?” He asks. “I have a meeting with the First Army Kaptain here in the morning, but we can leave after that.”

You look up at him, surprised.

“You don’t have to come with us.”

“You can’t go alone.”

“You could ask Ivan, or someone, to keep an eye on us.” He shakes his head.

“I will go with you.”

The next morning, Alina is positively giddy once you tell her about your trip, and she immediately ropes Mal into joining you as well.

Whilst Aleksander is meeting with the local First Army Kaptain, you make the necessary preparations for the four of you to ride down the coastline towards the patch of beach you had heard about.

When you see Aleksander approaching as you see to the horses, you immediately notice the tension in his shoulders, though that loosens once he catches sight of you through the people milling about on the street.

“How was it?” You ask in a low voice, and Aleksander dips his head down as he takes his horse’s reins from your hands.

“Later.” He assures you in a murmur. “We should enjoy the afternoon.”

The two of you look up at the sky, a cool layer of cloud shielding you from the sun.

“Hopefully it won’t rain.”

“I don’t believe it will.”

Aleksander is usually right about the weather, and you wonder if it’s a benefit of his immortality. He’s seen the sky before every storm over hundreds of years, if anyone can read the weather it would be him.

You take one of the less known roads out of Os Kervo, meaning that the ride down to the remote stretch of sandy shoreline is rather peaceful. The chilly breeze stings your cheeks, and you breathe in the fresh salty air with a content smile.

Alina is ecstatic to see the True Sea so close, and she’s the first person to dismount once your horses begin to tread over the sand.

“Come on.” Alina urges you with an eager smile, tugging on your wrist.

As you turn to dismount, you catch Aleksander’s gaze as he scours the surrounding area with a small frown. He gives you a reassuring nod, and you instantly know that it’s safe for you to let your guard down.

With a grin, you slide down from your horse, giving Alina a light shove before you take off running, calling out a delighted,

“Race you.”

She sprints after you, followed by Mal. He ends up reaching the sea first, and you roll your eyes at his triumphant grin, while Alina splashes him in response.

The three of you run, and chase each other, laughing and shrieking like children as you wade through the cold sea. It isn’t long before you’re shivering, but your enjoyment keeps you warm enough to continue.

Once you’ve exerted yourself, you return to Aleksander’s side, and the two of you walk along the length of the beach as Alina and Mal continue to run through the freezing water.

When you shiver, Aleksander unclasps his cloak and settles it around your shoulders. A grateful smile tugs on your lips as the soft fur brushes over your cheeks. As subtly as you can, you dip your face down to inhale Aleksander’s scent as it lingers on the fabric, and a warm feeling floods through your body.

You watch where you’re stepping as you walk, eyes scouring over each pebble and shattered sea shell that has been washed up to shore. A sudden sense of nostalgia seizes you.

“When I was small, I used to hunt along the sand for pieces of treasure.” You say softly.

The person from a small town in East Ravka that you’re pretending to be has never seen the True Sea, but you can share this memory with Aleksander. The only one who knows who you really are.

The corner of his mouth lifts fondly.

“Treasure?”

“Smoothened pieces of glass or broken pottery mostly.” You admit. “Though one time I found a clay milk bottle that was almost intact.”

Aleksander’s smile widens.

“I used to do something similar. When I was a boy, we were living in Novyi Zem for a few months.”

The two of you turn sharply at the sound of Alina crying out, but it’s only in protest of Mal carrying her in his arms and threatening to drop her into the water. So, Aleksander continues.

“There was an area of coastline, full of rocky crags, and I used to climb over them to search through the rock pools.”

The image of a miniature Aleksander, clambering over rocks and seaweed to peek into rock pools in search of hidden treasures has a smile growing on your face. Even with hundreds of years separating your childhoods, the two of you still have plenty of common ground.

A few times you bend down to examine a shell, or a particularly nice looking stone. Aleksander makes his own findings, turning them over with the tip of his boot until you can pick it up and admire it.

Once you’ve walked far enough, the two of you turn and head back to where you had left the horses. Aleksander has been quiet, and you know he must be thinking deeply about something. His brows are furrowed as he stares out at the sea.

“Something is bothering you.”

He looks over at you.

“The Navy is rather reluctant to assist us in our search.” Aleksander explains with a small sigh as he stares down at the sand beneath your feet. “The only ship large enough for our needs will be unavailable until summer.”

That’s too long to wait. You don’t say it aloud, because no doubt Aleksander is already thinking such a thing. Instead you say,

“I may have an idea.”

The corner of Aleksander’s mouth twitches with the hint of a smile, and amusement softens his previously dire expression.

“What is it?”

“Have you heard of a captain named Sturmhond?”

»»---------------------►

Aleksander did not like the idea of you going into Os Kervo’s roughest tavern in search of a pirate, especially alone. But you had insisted that if he, or even any of the other Grisha, came with you then you would be recognised. Hiring Sturmhond would require some subtlety.

Though you can’t help but agree with Aleksander’s sentiments, as you weave through the crowded bar, trying to find a spot to sit and observe. Especially when you feel the weight of your coin pouch leave your pocket, and you seize hold of someone’s wrist.

“I think that belongs to me.” You state as calmly as you can, keeping a tight hold of the man’s wrist.

He attempts to stare you down for a long moment, but you’re not afraid of a thief, not when you’ve faced Aleksander head on without knowing whether he would have you killed.

Then a man laughs from his nearby seat at the bar.

“Come on Bradshaw, if you’re gonna pick pockets don’t get angry when someone calls you out on it.”

The man, Bradshaw, looks between your determined expression and the fixed stare of the newcomer. Between them both, the newcomer suddenly has the majority of your attention.

He seems tall, and well built, with muddy red hair and green eyes. A familiar combination of features, that you’re certain you’ve read about. Bradshaw seemingly decides on the safest option, handing you your pouch back before he disappears into the crowd.

Sliding your money into your inside pocket this time, you nod towards the man who had come to your aid.

“Thanks.” He shrugs away your gratitude and gestures to the seat beside him.

“Have a drink with me?”

“I don’t accept drinks from strangers.” You reply smoothly.

“Well then, how about I introduce myself?” He says with a smirk lingering on his lips. “Sturmhond, at your service.”

Also known as the Second Prince Nikolai of Ravka, though you hope you won’t have to use that information to blackmail him.

“Sturmhond? The pirate?”

The corner of his smirk twitches as he feigns offence, and he corrects you,

“Privateer.” Raising your hands lightly in mock surrender, you smile.

“Do forgive me.” He grins.

“How about that drink then?”

With a nod, you accept the seat beside him, and he orders a drink for you both.

“As a matter of fact, you’re exactly the man I’ve been looking for.”

His eyes run over you in response to your words, no doubt trying to get a read on you under the guise of flirting.

“You’re not the first to tell me such a thing.”

“Are you always this cocky and self assured?” You remark with a raised brow, as the bartender places your drinks down in front of you both.

“High praise indeed. You must want something from me.”

Deciding not to waste any time, you state your demands.

“A ship and crew, to take myself and a small group along the Bone Road.”

The corner of his mouth twitches in amusement, as he traces his pointer finger down the length of his glass.

“Why do I suspect this is something to do with the appearance of the sun summoner, and a certain Second Army General?”

“And if I told you that said General was interested in hiring you?”

He leans closer to you, lowering his voice as he says,

“I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but I’m currently wanted by the Ravkan government for piracy.” You can’t help but remark teasingly,

“I thought you were a privateer.”

There’s a spark of laughter in his eyes before he leans away from you with a shrug, taking another drink.

“Needs must, sweetheart.”

“You’ll be paid handsomely. On our return to Ravka we can part ways, no consequences on your end. I can assure you.”

“You speak for the Darkling?”

Something in you bristles at Aleksander being called the Darkling. You know it’s the most common name used for him among Ravka’s everyday people, but it still has you feeling unsettled.

Nevertheless, you nod.

“Yes. I do.”

Sturmhond leans back on his elbow.

“Rumour has it you’re searching for the sea dragon. You’re asking me to risk my time, resources, and crew for the sake of a myth.”

“A few months ago the sun summoner was a myth.” You reason, but you can see he needs more of an incentive. “No one else is up for the challenge, but you seem like a man who would enjoy doing the impossible.”

Challenge sparks in his eyes, and you know you have him now. He leans closer, remarking with a confident grin.

“I prefer the term improbable.”

»»---------------------►

marvelmusing Tag List: @dreamlandcreations @blanchedelioncourt @idaofinfinity @slytherheign @ellooo0ooo @vixenofcourse

In Another Life Tag List: @parabatai-winchester @dangerousbluebirdpoetry @jambolska-grozdova @mxacegrey @budugu @cynthianokamaria @scarlettqueen190 @aikeia @eloquentree @hufflely-puffly

Aleksander M Tag List: @nyctophiliiiiaaa @jazmin2211

BB Characters Tag List: @rachlovesactors @noortsshift

[dailyanarchistposts]

A.2.8 Is it possible to be an anarchist without opposing hierarchy?

No. We have seen that anarchists abhor authoritarianism. But if one is an anti-authoritarian, one must oppose all hierarchical institutions, since they embody the principle of authority. For, as Emma Goldman argued, “it is not only government in the sense of the state which is destructive of every individual value and quality. It is the whole complex authority and institutional domination which strangles life. It is the superstition, myth, pretence, evasions, and subservience which support authority and institutional domination.” [Red Emma Speaks, p. 435] This means that “there is and will always be a need to discover and overcome structures of hierarchy, authority and domination and constraints on freedom: slavery, wage-slavery [i.e. capitalism], racism, sexism, authoritarian schools, etc.” [Noam Chomsky, Language and Politics, p. 364]

Thus the consistent anarchist must oppose hierarchical relationships as well as the state. Whether economic, social or political, to be an anarchist means to oppose hierarchy. The argument for this (if anybody needs one) is as follows:

“All authoritarian institutions are organised as pyramids: the state, the private or public corporation, the army, the police, the church, the university, the hospital: they are all pyramidal structures with a small group of decision-makers at the top and a broad base of people whose decisions are made for them at the bottom. Anarchism does not demand the changing of labels on the layers, it doesn’t want different people on top, it wants us to clamber out from underneath.” [Colin Ward, Anarchy in Action, p. 22]

Hierarchies “share a common feature: they are organised systems of command and obedience” and so anarchists seek “to eliminate hierarchy per se, not simply replace one form of hierarchy with another.” [Bookchin, The Ecology of Freedom, p. 27] A hierarchy is a pyramidally-structured organisation composed of a series of grades, ranks, or offices of increasing power, prestige, and (usually) remuneration. Scholars who have investigated the hierarchical form have found that the two primary principles it embodies are domination and exploitation. For example, in his classic article “What Do Bosses Do?” (Review of Radical Political Economy, Vol. 6, No. 2), a study of the modern factory, Steven Marglin found that the main function of the corporate hierarchy is not greater productive efficiency (as capitalists claim), but greater control over workers, the purpose of such control being more effective exploitation.

Control in a hierarchy is maintained by coercion, that is, by the threat of negative sanctions of one kind or another: physical, economic, psychological, social, etc. Such control, including the repression of dissent and rebellion, therefore necessitates centralisation: a set of power relations in which the greatest control is exercised by the few at the top (particularly the head of the organisation), while those in the middle ranks have much less control and the many at the bottom have virtually none.

Since domination, coercion, and centralisation are essential features of authoritarianism, and as those features are embodied in hierarchies, all hierarchical institutions are authoritarian. Moreover, for anarchists, any organisation marked by hierarchy, centralism and authoritarianism is state-like, or “statist.” And as anarchists oppose both the state and authoritarian relations, anyone who does not seek to dismantle all forms of hierarchy cannot be called an anarchist. This applies to capitalist firms. As Noam Chomsky points out, the structure of the capitalist firm is extremely hierarchical, indeed fascist, in nature:

“a fascist system… [is] absolutist — power goes from top down … the ideal state is top down control with the public essentially following orders. “Let’s take a look at a corporation… [I]f you look at what they are, power goes strictly top down, from the board of directors to managers to lower managers to ultimately the people on the shop floor, typing messages, and so on. There’s no flow of power or planning from the bottom up. People can disrupt and make suggestions, but the same is true of a slave society. The structure of power is linear, from the top down.” [Keeping the Rabble in Line, p. 237]

David Deleon indicates these similarities between the company and the state well when he writes:

“Most factories are like military dictatorships. Those at the bottom are privates, the supervisors are sergeants, and on up through the hierarchy. The organisation can dictate everything from our clothing and hair style to how we spend a large portion of our lives, during work. It can compel overtime; it can require us to see a company doctor if we have a medical complaint; it can forbid us free time to engage in political activity; it can suppress freedom of speech, press and assembly — it can use ID cards and armed security police, along with closed-circuit TVs to watch us; it can punish dissenters with ‘disciplinary layoffs’ (as GM calls them), or it can fire us. We are forced, by circumstances, to accept much of this, or join the millions of unemployed… In almost every job, we have only the ‘right’ to quit. Major decisions are made at the top and we are expected to obey, whether we work in an ivory tower or a mine shaft.” [“For Democracy Where We Work: A rationale for social self-management”, Reinventing Anarchy, Again, Howard J. Ehrlich (ed.), pp. 193–4]

Thus the consistent anarchist must oppose hierarchy in all its forms, including the capitalist firm. Not to do so is to support archy — which an anarchist, by definition, cannot do. In other words, for anarchists, ”[p]romises to obey, contracts of (wage) slavery, agreements requiring the acceptance of a subordinate status, are all illegitimate because they do restrict and restrain individual autonomy.” [Robert Graham, “The Anarchist Contract, Reinventing Anarchy, Again, Howard J. Ehrlich (ed.), p. 77] Hierarchy, therefore, is against the basic principles which drive anarchism. It denies what makes us human and “divest[s] the personality of its most integral traits; it denies the very notion that the individual is competent to deal not only with the management of his or her personal life but with its most important context: the social context.” [Murray Bookchin, Op. Cit., p. 202]

Some argue that as long as an association is voluntary, whether it has a hierarchical structure is irrelevant. Anarchists disagree. This is for two reasons. Firstly, under capitalism workers are driven by economic necessity to sell their labour (and so liberty) to those who own the means of life. This process re-enforces the economic conditions workers face by creating “massive disparities in wealth … [as] workers… sell their labour to the capitalist at a price which does not reflect its real value.” Therefore:

“To portray the parties to an employment contract, for example, as free and equal to each other is to ignore the serious inequality of bargaining power which exists between the worker and the employer. To then go on to portray the relationship of subordination and exploitation which naturally results as the epitome of freedom is to make a mockery of both individual liberty and social justice.” [Robert Graham, Op. Cit., p. 70]

It is for this reason that anarchists support collective action and organisation: it increases the bargaining power of working people and allows them to assert their autonomy (see section J).

Secondly, if we take the key element as being whether an association is voluntary or not we would have to argue that the current state system must be considered as “anarchy.” In a modern democracy no one forces an individual to live in a specific state. We are free to leave and go somewhere else. By ignoring the hierarchical nature of an association, you can end up supporting organisations based upon the denial of freedom (including capitalist companies, the armed forces, states even) all because they are “voluntary.” As Bob Black argues, ”[t]o demonise state authoritarianism while ignoring identical albeit contract-consecrated subservient arrangements in the large-scale corporations which control the world economy is fetishism at its worst.” [The Libertarian as Conservative, The Abolition of Work and other essays, p. 142] Anarchy is more than being free to pick a master.

Therefore opposition to hierarchy is a key anarchist position, otherwise you just become a “voluntary archist” — which is hardly anarchistic. For more on this see section A.2.14 ( Why is voluntarism not enough?).

Anarchists argue that organisations do not need to be hierarchical, they can be based upon co-operation between equals who manage their own affairs directly. In this way we can do without hierarchical structures (i.e. the delegation of power in the hands of a few). Only when an association is self-managed by its members can it be considered truly anarchistic.

We are sorry to belabour this point, but some capitalist apologists, apparently wanting to appropriate the “anarchist” name because of its association with freedom, have recently claimed that one can be both a capitalist and an anarchist at the same time (as in so-called “anarcho” capitalism). It should now be clear that since capitalism is based on hierarchy (not to mention statism and exploitation), “anarcho”-capitalism is a contradiction in terms. (For more on this, see Section F)