#Fascism: The Career of a Concept

[tyrantisterror]

Your recent train of posts about you-know-who’s book series got me thinking. You once said “The Owl House works as a sort of rebuttal to Harry Potter in a lot of ways”, care to elaborate on that statement? Especially in regards to how The Owl House’s worldbuilding and themes clash with Harry Potter’s?

Oh man... I don't want my blog to be consumed by Harry Potter Hot Takes. I'd prefer to vent most of those feelings through my wizard books instead, it's more productive that way.

So, ok, short version: The Owl House is about a teenager from the mundane world discovering there's a magical world hidden away, goes there to learn magic, and in the process uncovers a plot by an abominable fascist to commit genocide. In very simplistic terms, that is more or less the same plot as Harry Potter.

But the devil's in the details, isn't it? Luz doesn't have any grand inheritance to claim, no prophecy to fulfill, nothing that makes her the most special specialest special person of all time. There's even a whole episode early on where a villain tries to lure her to her doom by claiming she's the chosen one, and the lesson is that NO ONE is "chosen" for greatness - greatness is something you make yourself, not something that's thrust upon you. She is not inherently gifted as a witch - in fact, she struggles harder because she doesn't have a a special bladder true witches are born with, and has to learn an ancient and forgotten method of spellcasting basically from scratch to cast spells at all. She is, emphatically and at times definitely deliberately, the opposite of what Harry Potter is.

So is her academic experience. There's a magic school in this setting, and (at first) it wants nothing to do with Luz because she's human, not a witch, and thus is believed to be incapable of casting spells. So Luz's primary mode of education on magic comes from a private mentor, Eda, who is also a wanted criminal and social outcast because of her disdain for the draconian rules of their society. Eda is an unconventional but magnificent mentor, one who is as willing to try new things and learn new methods as Luz herself, and who helps Luz discover ways to make possible what everyone else claims is impossible. Eventually Luz does convince the magic school to take her in, but in the process she changes how it runs, challenging a lot of its preconceived notions and forcing them to do better.

Which is vital, because the biggest problem facing the society of this magical world is narrow-minded reliance on outdated social categorization. Like HP, people are sorted into categories (covens here instead of houses), which they are then forced to stick to and never dabble in the others. It is explicitly compared to both the concept of tracking in real world education (i.e. forcing kids into a career path early and ONLY giving them education relevant to that one career) and the house system of HP:

And it's wrong. It's both presented as needlessly limiting, terrible for encouraging advancement and growth of both the students and society as a whole, and an immoral system that's only kept alive by the "Well, this is how we've always done it" inertia that keeps so many awful traditions in education alive. And I really do mean it's immoral, because it's the brain child and secretly crucial evil tool of a genocidal fascist.

I kind of cringe at writing those two words since I feel people have been WAY too quick to accuse cartoon villains from children's shows of fascism and genocide - like, Chairface Chippendale writing his name on the moon with a laser would probably kill a shitload of people in real life, but that doesn't mean he's an analogue to Hitler. But Belos, like fellow Disney villain Frollo, is clearly intended to be exactly that: a genocidal fascist. In a world full of magic-fueled absurdist black comedy beats, Emperor Belos stands out as a consistently serious threat, tonally dissonant with his surroundings in a way that makes him chillingly effective as a villain. And like real world powerful bigots, his power primarily comes from the fact that the systems of society favor his mindset over those of outsides like Luz and Eda - all the systems of oppression our heroes chafe against were either created by or worsened by him, with the express purpose of using them to kill everyone and everything in the magical world.

Luz could not be more thematically opposed to her enemy, and the story is incredibly consistent in showing how defeating Belos alone isn't enough, but that the systems that empowered him have to be disproven and dismantled. His enablers must be destroyed or humbled, the prejudices he encouraged must be torn down and fought at every turn, and innovation and progress must be embraced for the good of all. There's so much stuff you could analyze about the themes in that show regarding oppression and the othering of people who are different, and it's all so, SO much more consistent than the discussion of the same themes you'll find in Harry Potter.

[manorpunk]

“The thing about fascism is that it’s fun. You get a uniform and a cool title and the Blood of the Covenant, and for some people that’s all they want out of life. Class Consciousness is a more difficult path, but it is a hundred times as rewarding as the false promises of fascism. And listen, you’ve got to remember, some of these people out there are just hogs. Don’t blame ‘em, it’s not their fault, they were born with a dozen boots on their neck, but you’ve got to remember, they have been so atomized, so rusticized, that you will have to drag them kicking and screaming to any conception of the world larger than their immediate surroundings.“ - Dashiell Redacted-Bezos, co-founder of the State Pantheon and father of Sunny Roosevelt

“tgirl swag has the sanction of heaven” - Sunny Roosevelt

President Sunny Roosevelt is a “second generation” Muskling. Her mother, Theophania Bezos-Redacted, was a Bezos-baby Muskling who worked as the High Priestess for a coven of Etsy-witches. Theophania’s husband was Dashiell Redacted-Bezos, a “man behind the curtain” of the State Pantheon, hanging out in dingy Bay Area flophouses with Hyperwonks and Soulhackers and refining their cokehead ramblings into a complete self-contained ideology (he neglected to mention how he was also heavily influenced by his wife’s practices, because god forbid women do anything).

You may have guessed by now that ‘Sunny Roosevelt’ is not her given name; it is the name of the avatar she controls, though by this point the line between the two is nearly invisible. Born in 204X, she started her vtuber career in the late fifties, and then became the mascot for Frontwave Imaging Inc, a Southeast Asian company that specialized in tensor holography, as a public advertisement for their tensor holography tech. The ad campaign was a runaway success. Sunny was launched into public awareness, where she will remain until she dies.

Naturally, there are countless rumors surrounding Sunny Roosevelt’s ‘real body’ - she’s a robot, she’s a brain in a jar, she‘s in cryogenic stasis, she was cloned from the DNA of George Washington king-in-the-mountain style. Official stance: no comment.

[batsarebetterthanpeople]

The problem with any attempt by hollywood to make media which takes place in the universe of the hunger games is that it all runs the risk of undermining or completely misunderstanding the political messaging and critique the original book series presents. Because this isn’t an orwell novel which provides a generic critique of authoritarianism or even of fascism specifically. The hunger games novels are very specifically providing a critique of the united states and of the role that hollywood itself plays in maintaining power. The Hunger Games presents us with a society in which the very very rich throw up in order to eat more and a very very poor who are starving, in other words a capitalist economic system. It also presents us with the very rich being gaudy and ostentatious in their dress the way that we see rich hollywood elites dress when they attend awards shows, and it presents those people conducting a reality tv show style death match that those living in poverty send their kids to and if they win they receive economic security. Those from districts one and two, career districts which are closest to the capital but which the elites in the capitol still look down on represent the middle class who jump at the opportunity to send their children into that meat grinder in order to win fame and fortune but those from the outlying districts who represent the very poor know that it is a death sentence. The villain in the hunger games is the unequal economic structure and hollywood whose job it is to sell us on the american dream and keep us in line. Therefore any hollywood blockbuster attempting to emulate the book series in question is sort of doomed from the start. The original 4 movies could succeed so long as they stuck to the script the books layed out but any hollywood original script set in that universe, such as this one, is either forced to tone down it’s messaging in order to make it past the writing room and into filming and eventually onto the screen, or to lose sight of the original concept altogether to become a shameless cash grab. To its credit I think Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes falls into the former category of having toned it down, but ultimately it does become somewhat strange in places owing to hollywood's own inability to criticize itself too harshly

[girlactionfigure]

Nobel Prize-winning neurobiologist Rita Levi-Montalcini was born in 1909 to a Jewish-Italian family in Turin. Levi-Montalcini's years in medical school coincided with the rise of fascism in Italy and the imposition of anti-Semitic laws which limited her career prospects. Once WWII broke out, she and her family decided to stay in Italy rather than flee overseas and she built a laboratory in her bedroom to continue her research work. It was in this makeshift laboratory that she began studying the development of chicken embryos; research that laid the underpinning of her later Nobel Prize-winning work on the mechanism of cell growth regulation.

After the Nazi invasion of Italy in 1943, Levi-Montalcini and her family were forced underground and moved to Florence where she worked as a doctor in Allied war camps after the city was liberated. Following the war, in 1946, she moved to the U.S. for more than twenty years to conduct research at Washington University in St. Louis. It was there that she discovered nerve growth factor, a protein which regulates the growth of cells; this discovery was critical to better understanding tumor growth among other conditions.

It was for this breakthrough research that the Nobel committee described her work, along with fellow winner Stanley Cohen, as “a fascinating example of how a skilled observer can create a concept out of apparent chaos.” Both received the 1986 Nobel Prize for Medicine. Dr. Levi-Montalcini passed away in 2012 at the age of 103.

[defaultnaming]

I don't know if this is just me reading too much into things but there was something really icky about picard's speech to jack on the cube basically saying he was incomplete without fatherhood. It's genuinely a cool motivator (though bev should've been the one on the cube instead but they hate mums ig just sayin) and some characters definitely have it (AGAIN.... BEVERLY), but the reason it felt uncomfortable for me was that picard was a career man. As in, no family, no thank you sort of career man. Anytime we see the fantasy of a bio family is when he is being crushed by the resposibility of the picard family name (see nexus only after his bro dies) and it's quite clear he doesn't like children. Again the very first ep of tng defines this part of a character for him.

I'm not saying people don't change, they do and should. What I am saying is that it sends an uneasy message to those (like me) who may see picard choosing to his life accomplishments and value elsewhere as a positive model in fiction (you don't need to define yourslef by what you have the potential to create) by going "look that didn't matter or it wasn't as valuable because having children was always the missing piece, you should have a child to truly 'complete' you even if it goes against who you are as a person because that's what truly matters in the human experience".

Another thing this scene does as well is basically imply you have to accept your child's scumbag actions because "child" and "love" reasons I guess. Jack, by all narrative cues, willing submits to the borg knowing what that would do. Threw a tantrum and hopped on the cybernetic fascism train to kill and enslave other people. Willingly joined the collective that he knows has traumatised his family nevermind anyone else. The narrative, you would expect, would be picard AT LEAST getting jack to see what he has done wrong, that he has hurt others, the people he loves. NOT coddle him with platitudes of love and emotion to change him that again we see narratively he is not wanting for (again, stop ignoring mums). It all lends to this horrible message that you accept your child, that you never wanted, in ABSOLUTE, even if their actions against you and others are unforgivable and that truly is an outdated concept we need to escape from.

It's a sigular issue amongst many in picard s3 that leads to a sense of abandonment of nuance for the sake of nostalgia even at the cost of the characters you love. This series felt 2d in its character paths and that scene in the final ep really encapsulated it for me.

[jurgan]

Young Justice Season 3 Recap I watched this season gradually over several months, so I might not remember all the details, but I want to give some thoughts on the themes I saw presented. The concept of Anti-Life fascinates me. It sounds dumb when you hear the name, like it's a death ray or something. I'd heard of the "Anti-Life Equation," but I didn't think much of it until I read Kirby's Fourth World and saw what it was. The idea that there's a secret technique to obliterate someone's free will and replace it with your own is terrifying (Asimov's Mule had a similar power). The opposite of life isn't death. Life is about relationship with the environment around you. You take, you give back, you have an impact and you die. Anti-Life is to take away your ability to have an impact on the world at all. The Equation itself isn't much more than a plot device, at times a mere maguffin, but the ideology is very real. It's a view where people exist only to further the will of those more powerful and can be sacrificed at will. Kirby stared fascism straight in the eye during WWII, and Darkseid was his vision of the ultimate tyrant. Be it Hitler, Stalin, or Nixon, anyone who used others for their own gain was part of the same force of evil in Kirby's eyes. Young Justice is at base a coming of age story, so it makes sense that the god who tries to take their free will is in the form of a cloying authority figure. Granny Goodness is herself a tool of Darkseid's ideology. Her most direct nemesis is Garfield Logan, who rejects being a tool for anyone's will. Making her a Hollywood producer allows for some satire about the commodification of actors and other "talent," but teenage rebellion is pretty universal, so the themes of "coming of age" and "demanding free will" merge seamlessly in the dehumanizing world of entertainment production. Garfield starts The Outsiders with the express purpose of telling people, especially young people, that they don't have to follow dehumanizing orders, they have the right to stand up for themselves. Violet and Victor are the other characters with the most pronounced arcs. Both of them are a mergence of technology and organic life, but they come at it from opposite directions. Violet is a Motherbox using the corpse of Gabrielle to act, while Victor is a human kept alive with a Fatherbox. Violet is a newborn teenager trying to figure out what she is, while Victor is a teenager who lost what he was. Both of them come into their own by giving up what they thought was important- Victor accepts the end of his football career and "normal life," while Violet gives up her relationship with Brion. Makes me think of Renard saying he lost "his Anastasia" in preserving his integrity. Death and rebirth is an old part of the heroes' journey, and the two V's are blatant examples stretched over the course of a season. Cyborg's acceptance is signalled, funnily enough, by saying "booyah" for the first time. Life, as these two learn, isn't about what kind of cells are in your body. It's about your ability to make choices that matter. Vic trying to hold onto his past and Violet trying to run from hers/Gabrielle's were anti-life. Opening up to their teammates was a chance to be accepted. I've historically been more of a Marvel fan, but I'm starting to appreciate DC's conception of heroes as mythological embodiments of concepts. If Darkseid is Anti-Life, it makes sense for his nemesis to be Superman. I recently saw the movie Kill Bill for the first time. The late David Carradine gives a great speech about the mythological significance of Superman, and it's hilarious because he's blatantly wrong. Bill can't imagine a powerful person being happy with a mundane life, so he assumes Superman's Clark Kent persona is a bumbling dope because Superman is mocking normal people. This is not meant to be taken at face value, it's a sign that Bill doesn't understand people with different worldviews. Either that, or it's just a mockery of the kind of pretentious nerd who writes essays about the philosophy of superhero stories. *coughs nervously* (Bishansky, if you're reading, I'm guessing you've had to yell about this before.) Superman has great respect for normal people, after all he was raised by them, and his heroism is all about helping them live up to their own potential. In the stories where he does decide to make people's decisions for them, like Red Son, he quickly becomes as much a tyant as Darkseid. His origins are reminiscent of Moses, so he fights against slavery in all its forms. It's all in service of Life. If Darkseid is Anti-Life, then what is Vandal Savage? He kind of took a backseat in this season, and I wonder if he's really on the same scale as Darkseid. He's earth-based, but he's moving into the bigger leagues. This is why he breaks his alliance with Darkseid once the latter gets the Anti-Life Equation. There's something surreally funny about Savage just knocking on the door of the Team's headquarters. I would say Vandal Savage represents the State of Nature. "Nature" is a word with largely positive connotations today, but when Thomas Hobbes used the term he meant a cruel war of all against all where life is "nasty, brutish, and short." This is Savage's utopia. He desires constant struggle in the belief that it will make people stronger. This is why he's willing to work with Darkseid temporarily but can't allow him to obtain complete victory. Maybe that's why he calls his group The Light- he sees them as fighting against tyranny of Dark(seid), but his enlightenment is a lesson of violence. On this axis, Savage's philosophical nemesis is Batman. Batman, of course, is motivated to protect children from the senseless chaos that took his parents. Batman is a Hobbesian, and Batman Inc. is his Leviathan. (Disclaimer that I'm specifically talking about Young Justice here, Batman has had many different characterizations.) He resigns from the Justice League because he thinks only he has the will to do what is necessary and his decisions cannot be compromised by a corrupt leader. This is a decision Superman can't make because he's simply too powerful and needs self-imposed restraints, so he chooses to compromise. But Batman's fight against the State of Nature leads him into embracing the methods of Anti-Life. He lies, he manipulates, and in doing so he takes meaning away from the decisions others make. I don't want to conclude that it's simply a matter of balance. Life is opposed by both the violent actions of murderers and the subtle control of tyrants. The season doesn't end with a conclusive defeat of Anti-Life, and maybe it shouldn't. Kirby never got a chance to defeat Darkseid, and Weisman doesn't like definitive endings anyway. When your enemy represents a concept, it makes some sense that they're always ready for the next fight. Fascism was defeated in 1945, but it has come back in recent years. Darkseid is always preparing for the next round. I guess the only arc left is the Markovs. How do they fit? Brion, I think, is Batman if he fully embraced Anti-Life. He is angry because he could not protect his family, so he becomes a tyrant. Dr. Jace is extremely Anti-Life, treating children as nothing more than puppets, yet he hires her. Here's a question: Why does Brion accept tyranny while Tara turns her back on it? Why does the traitor become redeemed? I think maybe Slade did too good a job on her. He taught her an anarchic philosophy where you should be suspicious of everyone, and she turned it on him. The Team embraced her with a simple love. They accepted her as she was. Philosophical arguments only get you so far. In the end, human connection wins out. And so the Team and the League turn the page on the chapter by rejecting the methods of Anti-Life. They may not be perfect and they can't do everything, but they can set an example. From now on, the heroes will embrace a harmonious existence. No one is above anyone else, no one takes and gives in unequal measure, they are all equally valuable. Information and care will flow freely between them as they attempt to make the world a better place.

[just-the-cool-page]

The Piper at

the Gates of Dawn

Fifty five years ago, the Floyd embarked on their journey in ernest with their first full-length album. Syd Barrett, their original front man, lyricist and composer, and admittedly the most camera-friendly of the bunch. He would also prove to be the most vulnerable of the band, soon spiraling into mental illness, at least partly due to excess use of hallucinogens. Figuratively or literally, Syd got them on stage and into the light. He was their light. And ever after his departure, the Floyd have voiced their gratitude for that light pushing them into growing success. Whether comprised of regret, remorse, or just sorrow, they never seem to have lost sight of the cost Syd paid, presumably not at their urging. But it must be (or have been for a long time) a kind of psychological survivors' guilt. Syd didn't die of an overdose like other beautiful artists. Nor was he abandoned really. His descent into madness made him genuinely impossible to work with. Original management for the Floyd even chose to keep Barrett over them! Barrett and Pink Floyd were equally productive through 1970. The band even supported production of his studio albums, particularly David Gilmour, Syd's "replacement." Ever since, Gilmour's heart and character has matched his looks, that of a lion, and not the madman. (He would later discover and support Kate Bush in launching her remarkable career in music.)

After a few albums of more collaborative work, with Waters often at the helm, Gilmour would "right their ship" with the Meddle album and set their course for more cohesive works. Collaborative work continued with a more balanced feel, but with Waters (more honed than tamed by Gilmour) soon regaining control of concept, composition and lyrics. Even when delving into matters of mental disturbance on The Dark Side of the Moon, the band itself wasn't going insane. Complete balance was achieved between daring concepts, musical and lyrical composition, and mastery of production. Highly narrative, visual, and heavy with sound-scaping, listening to Dark Side is more akin to watching a Kubrick film in 70mm on the big screen with surround sound. Plainly, Gilmour's calm influence on the band was a healthy one and not heavy-handed. Collaboration was at its strongest. Coherence and sobriety were no longer the enemy.

Emboldened by the band's heartiness though, Waters' control went over the deep end, culminating, quite ironically, with his mega-opus, the Wall. The album is arguably all about rooting out the fascism of the ego, perhaps overcoming narcissism. Confronting this most massive of rock-star downfalls was, in the real-life making of the album, precisely what Roger was failing to do. Like any intoxicated megalomania-addict, he was blind to his destructive behavior, exactly like the character dubbed "Pink" on the album and in the fully realized Alan Parker film. Pink transforms into the neo-nazi-inspired tyrant, "Hammer."

Having spent his credibility with the band, he essentially achieved destruction of (that iteration of) Pink Floyd, just as Pink/Hammer achieves destruction of himself/ his life/ psyche/ marriage.

Any number of unconscious motivations or desires could have been at work:

To return to the careless, chaotic days of the late '60s.

To destroy the band that he felt "held him back," like the wife who's abandoned in the film.

To destroy the band as if he were some twisted angel of mercy.

There's an even darker parallel and hubris to note. WWII themes pervade The Wall, especially in the film. The fascism, battlefields (internal as well), and even factory/ death-camps. Waters sooner or later became aware that he broke up the band and made the excuse that its time had come, that it was a necessary sacrifice to complete the important work, to artistically fully render "his struggle." "Sacrifice" is bizarrely the translation of "holocaust." Sacrificing others, or sacrificing on others behalf (a mental gymnastic of rationalization), is a vile concept. Sacrificing others for a presumed "greater good" is explicitly the basis of nazism/fascism. Using the ends to justify the means was presumably what Waters was trying dismantle.

It is bewildering, forty-two years later, how accomplished The Wall was--and still is. It has a deep anti-fascism message on a deeply mental and psychological level. Yet his herculean efforts were intensely damaging. Pink Floyd did survive, but many believe they suffered too critical a loss to fully recover, and far less due to Waters' departure itself than to the destructive and traumatic nature of it.

Pink Floyd has seemed a bit timid ever since. A song here and there has stood out, but the raw power was long-gone for decades. And at this point, are they honestly the same band with only one remaining original member? Nick Mason is a terrifically talented drummer, however, so somewhat ironically, Nick Mason's Sucerful of Secrets (his offshoot) has, in four years, out-performed the last twenty-four years of Pink Floyd's own live output.

[onenakedfarmer]

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT Fascism: A Warning

Hitler's claim to distinction rested not on the quality of his ideas, but instead on his extraordinary drive to turn warped concepts into reality. Where others hesitated or were constrained by moral scruples, he preferred to act and saw emotional hardness as essential.

From early in his career, he was a genius at reading a crowd and modulating his message accordingly. In conversations with advisers, he was frank about this. He said that most people earnestly desired to have faith in something and were not intellectually equipped to quibble over what that object of belief might be.

He thought it shrewd, therefore, to reduce issues to terms that were easy to grasp and to lure his audiences into thinking that behind the many sources of their problems there loomed a single adversary. “There are…only two possibilities,” he explained, “either the victory of the Aryan side or its annihilation and the victory of the Jews.”

Hitler felt that his countrymen were looking for a man who spoke to their anger, understood their fears, and sought their participation in a stirring and righteous cause. He was delighted, not dismayed, by the outrage his speeches generated abroad. He believed that his followers wanted to see him challenged, because they yearned to hear him express contempt for those who thought they could silence him.

The image of a brave man standing up against powerful foes is immensely appealing. In this way, Hitler could make even his persecution of the defenseless seem like self-defense.

[epitome-the-burnkid-viii]

🧩The good, bad, weird, & wild📺 Welcome to the 🎱#youtuberecommendedchronicles🔮 Come find my shows #SupplementalBroadcast & #PanPanenPiousPropheticPonderings on YouTube & Rumble!🎟️ #CurrentEvents #History #Truth #Philosophy #TheGreatAwakening 🙏

[fleetsparrow]

I got the below quote in a writer's newsletter today, and it rubbed me the wrong way.

As a creative, you answer only to your art. No one else gets to decide. If you have breath in your body and a mind that functions, you can create when, if, and for as long as you like.

The above quote doesn't seem so bad on its own. Indeed, read out of context, it's almost inspirational.

But the below photo was also attached to this message:

The photo reads: "All limitations are self-imposed."

Taken together, they create a message I'm really getting tired of.

Yes, in general, I agree with the idea of these statements. Your creativity and creations don't belong to anyone else. Nobody else has the right to tell you what you should and shouldn't create or how you should create it.

But last time I checked, I didn't choose capitalism. I didn't choose ableism. I didn't choose racism, or white supremacy, or the continual re-emergence of fascism. Yet these are all real limitations we live with.

No, not all limitations are self-imposed.

Yes, you can always add your own limits and blocks to your own creativity. But why is it the people who tell you that all your limitations are self-imposed are the ones who have the fewest limits? The ones who've "made it"? The ones who are selling you something?

Maybe they've forgotten what it's like to try and create while also trying to survive in society. Maybe, because they became established so long ago and in such different circumstances, they genuinely can't comprehend what things are like for the rest of us. Maybe they don't care; after all, they bootstrapped their way to a career, why can't you? Don't we, as the saying goes, all have the same 24 hours as Beyoncé?

And, I don't know, maybe to some people, this concept of self-imposed limitations is inspiring. Maybe it gets some people motivated, because they only have themselves to be accountable to.

But I don't think that applies to most of us.

Most of the creatives I know—the visual artists, the writers, the craftspeople, and all of the rest of us—are constantly hitting the wall of others' limitations on us.

It's very hard to create when you're constantly anxious. It's incredibly difficult to create when you're struggling. It's nearly impossible to freely create under the limitations of capitalism and white supremacy.

That doesn't mean we can't do it. That doesn't make it any less satisfying or less important or less of an accomplishment when we do create. But we are not all living under the same limitations.

The abled cishet white man who has his own home office and who can sequester himself away for hours each day secure in the knowledge that his entire life and household won't fall apart while he's away does not have the same limitations as a disabled queer parent working two jobs and living in a shared one bedroom apartment.

Yes, by the measure of time in seconds and minutes and hours, we all have the same 24 hours as everyone else.

But we don't all have the same resources. We don't have all the same failsafes. Just because we all live under similar circumstances, it does not mean we all experience the same consequences of those circumstances.

So, no, all limitations are not self-imposed. You can still do creative things under them. You can still make art under the limitations you live with.

But those limitations are not your fault. They do not come from you. They are not yours to solve alone.

Create what you can when you can how you can. Create for joy. Create for expression. Create for yourself and for your people. Create for love and for life and for the sake of creating.

But don't kill yourself to do it. Don't beat yourself up for not being "productive" to a capitalist society's never-ending demands.

Everything moves in cycles. When you're deep in the hibernation of winter, it may seem like the growth of spring will never return. It will.

Create within your limitations. Create to break your limitations. But don't blame yourself for the existence of your limitations.

[pinklifest]

Cultural Revolution and Agricultural Changes

The Cultural Revolution Unleashed

The political shift on September 9, 1944, ushered in what became known as the “cultural revolution,” aiming to impose Marxism-Leninism as the state ideology across all aspects of life. Borrowing from Soviet traditions, the pretext of combating “pro-fascist ideas” led to the dismissal of numerous teachers, professors, and university students who faced expulsion without credible accusations of fascist actions. The totalitarian state enforced unparalleled censorship and control over cultural activities, banning any “western influence” such as books, music, movies, and fashion, branding them as “ideological diversion.” Intellectuals and men of culture faced repression for their free thinking and pursuit of intellectual independence City Tours Istanbul.

Coercive Agricultural Cooperation

Simultaneous with political changes was the launch of mass agricultural cooperation at the end of 1948. This initiative employed physical violence, political persecution, and psychological pressure on farmers. While the communist regime granted considerable privileges to party members, the concept of being an “active fighter against fascism and capitalism” became a pathway to career advancement for hundreds of thousands. Under Stalin’s influence, the ruling elite turned against some of their comrades using the Bolshevik slogan of “persecution of the enemy with a party membership card.” Prominent communists, including Traicho Rostov, the former First Secretary of the Central Committee, fell victim to these internal purges.

Leadership Transitions and Concentration of Power

In the summer of 1949, Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, known for his anti-fascist activities, passed away in the Soviet Union, leaving a complex legacy in Bulgarian and world history. His successor, Vasil Kolarov, also met an untimely death in February 1950. Valko Chervenkov, who spent years in Soviet exile and gained favor with Stalin, assumed the role of Prime Minister and leader of the Communist Party. Elected Chairman of the National Council of the Fatherland Front, Chervenkov consolidated power, holding sway over the entire apparatus.

The aftermath of September 9, 1944, brought about a cultural revolution and coercive agricultural changes, altering the fabric of Bulgarian society. Internal purges and leadership transitions marked a tumultuous period, setting the stage for the concentrated power wielded by Valko Chervenkov in the years that followed.

[bulgariakitchen]

Cultural Revolution and Agricultural Changes

The Cultural Revolution Unleashed

The political shift on September 9, 1944, ushered in what became known as the “cultural revolution,” aiming to impose Marxism-Leninism as the state ideology across all aspects of life. Borrowing from Soviet traditions, the pretext of combating “pro-fascist ideas” led to the dismissal of numerous teachers, professors, and university students who faced expulsion without credible accusations of fascist actions. The totalitarian state enforced unparalleled censorship and control over cultural activities, banning any “western influence” such as books, music, movies, and fashion, branding them as “ideological diversion.” Intellectuals and men of culture faced repression for their free thinking and pursuit of intellectual independence City Tours Istanbul.

Coercive Agricultural Cooperation

Simultaneous with political changes was the launch of mass agricultural cooperation at the end of 1948. This initiative employed physical violence, political persecution, and psychological pressure on farmers. While the communist regime granted considerable privileges to party members, the concept of being an “active fighter against fascism and capitalism” became a pathway to career advancement for hundreds of thousands. Under Stalin’s influence, the ruling elite turned against some of their comrades using the Bolshevik slogan of “persecution of the enemy with a party membership card.” Prominent communists, including Traicho Rostov, the former First Secretary of the Central Committee, fell victim to these internal purges.

Leadership Transitions and Concentration of Power

In the summer of 1949, Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, known for his anti-fascist activities, passed away in the Soviet Union, leaving a complex legacy in Bulgarian and world history. His successor, Vasil Kolarov, also met an untimely death in February 1950. Valko Chervenkov, who spent years in Soviet exile and gained favor with Stalin, assumed the role of Prime Minister and leader of the Communist Party. Elected Chairman of the National Council of the Fatherland Front, Chervenkov consolidated power, holding sway over the entire apparatus.

The aftermath of September 9, 1944, brought about a cultural revolution and coercive agricultural changes, altering the fabric of Bulgarian society. Internal purges and leadership transitions marked a tumultuous period, setting the stage for the concentrated power wielded by Valko Chervenkov in the years that followed.

[lifebeg]

Cultural Revolution and Agricultural Changes

The Cultural Revolution Unleashed

The political shift on September 9, 1944, ushered in what became known as the “cultural revolution,” aiming to impose Marxism-Leninism as the state ideology across all aspects of life. Borrowing from Soviet traditions, the pretext of combating “pro-fascist ideas” led to the dismissal of numerous teachers, professors, and university students who faced expulsion without credible accusations of fascist actions. The totalitarian state enforced unparalleled censorship and control over cultural activities, banning any “western influence” such as books, music, movies, and fashion, branding them as “ideological diversion.” Intellectuals and men of culture faced repression for their free thinking and pursuit of intellectual independence City Tours Istanbul.

Coercive Agricultural Cooperation

Simultaneous with political changes was the launch of mass agricultural cooperation at the end of 1948. This initiative employed physical violence, political persecution, and psychological pressure on farmers. While the communist regime granted considerable privileges to party members, the concept of being an “active fighter against fascism and capitalism” became a pathway to career advancement for hundreds of thousands. Under Stalin’s influence, the ruling elite turned against some of their comrades using the Bolshevik slogan of “persecution of the enemy with a party membership card.” Prominent communists, including Traicho Rostov, the former First Secretary of the Central Committee, fell victim to these internal purges.

Leadership Transitions and Concentration of Power

In the summer of 1949, Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, known for his anti-fascist activities, passed away in the Soviet Union, leaving a complex legacy in Bulgarian and world history. His successor, Vasil Kolarov, also met an untimely death in February 1950. Valko Chervenkov, who spent years in Soviet exile and gained favor with Stalin, assumed the role of Prime Minister and leader of the Communist Party. Elected Chairman of the National Council of the Fatherland Front, Chervenkov consolidated power, holding sway over the entire apparatus.

The aftermath of September 9, 1944, brought about a cultural revolution and coercive agricultural changes, altering the fabric of Bulgarian society. Internal purges and leadership transitions marked a tumultuous period, setting the stage for the concentrated power wielded by Valko Chervenkov in the years that followed.

[socialifestyle]

Cultural Revolution and Agricultural Changes

The Cultural Revolution Unleashed

The political shift on September 9, 1944, ushered in what became known as the “cultural revolution,” aiming to impose Marxism-Leninism as the state ideology across all aspects of life. Borrowing from Soviet traditions, the pretext of combating “pro-fascist ideas” led to the dismissal of numerous teachers, professors, and university students who faced expulsion without credible accusations of fascist actions. The totalitarian state enforced unparalleled censorship and control over cultural activities, banning any “western influence” such as books, music, movies, and fashion, branding them as “ideological diversion.” Intellectuals and men of culture faced repression for their free thinking and pursuit of intellectual independence City Tours Istanbul.

Coercive Agricultural Cooperation

Simultaneous with political changes was the launch of mass agricultural cooperation at the end of 1948. This initiative employed physical violence, political persecution, and psychological pressure on farmers. While the communist regime granted considerable privileges to party members, the concept of being an “active fighter against fascism and capitalism” became a pathway to career advancement for hundreds of thousands. Under Stalin’s influence, the ruling elite turned against some of their comrades using the Bolshevik slogan of “persecution of the enemy with a party membership card.” Prominent communists, including Traicho Rostov, the former First Secretary of the Central Committee, fell victim to these internal purges.

Leadership Transitions and Concentration of Power

In the summer of 1949, Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, known for his anti-fascist activities, passed away in the Soviet Union, leaving a complex legacy in Bulgarian and world history. His successor, Vasil Kolarov, also met an untimely death in February 1950. Valko Chervenkov, who spent years in Soviet exile and gained favor with Stalin, assumed the role of Prime Minister and leader of the Communist Party. Elected Chairman of the National Council of the Fatherland Front, Chervenkov consolidated power, holding sway over the entire apparatus.

The aftermath of September 9, 1944, brought about a cultural revolution and coercive agricultural changes, altering the fabric of Bulgarian society. Internal purges and leadership transitions marked a tumultuous period, setting the stage for the concentrated power wielded by Valko Chervenkov in the years that followed.

[girlactionfigure]

Nobel Prize-winning neurobiologist Rita Levi-Montalcini was born in 1909 to a Jewish-Italian family in Turin. Levi-Montalcini's years in medical school coincided with the rise of fascism in Italy and the imposition of anti-Semitic laws which limited her career prospects. Once WWII broke out, she and her family decided to stay in Italy rather than flee overseas and she built a laboratory in her bedroom to continue her research work. It was in this makeshift laboratory that she began studying the development of chicken embryos; research that laid the underpinning of her later Nobel Prize-winning work on the mechanism of cell growth regulation.

After the Nazi invasion of Italy in 1943, Levi-Montalcini and her family were forced underground and moved to Florence where she worked as a doctor in Allied war camps after the city was liberated. Following the war, in 1946, she moved to the U.S. for more than twenty years to conduct research at Washington University in St. Louis. It was there that she discovered nerve growth factor, a protein which regulates the growth of cells; this discovery was critical to better understanding tumor growth among other conditions.

It was for this breakthrough research that the Nobel committee described her work, along with fellow winner Stanley Cohen, as “a fascinating example of how a skilled observer can create a concept out of apparent chaos.” Both received the 1986 Nobel Prize for Medicine. Dr. Levi-Montalcini passed away in 2012 at the age of 103.

A Mighty Girl

[younglsre]

Cultural Revolution and Agricultural Changes

The Cultural Revolution Unleashed

The political shift on September 9, 1944, ushered in what became known as the “cultural revolution,” aiming to impose Marxism-Leninism as the state ideology across all aspects of life. Borrowing from Soviet traditions, the pretext of combating “pro-fascist ideas” led to the dismissal of numerous teachers, professors, and university students who faced expulsion without credible accusations of fascist actions. The totalitarian state enforced unparalleled censorship and control over cultural activities, banning any “western influence” such as books, music, movies, and fashion, branding them as “ideological diversion.” Intellectuals and men of culture faced repression for their free thinking and pursuit of intellectual independence City Tours Istanbul.

Coercive Agricultural Cooperation

Simultaneous with political changes was the launch of mass agricultural cooperation at the end of 1948. This initiative employed physical violence, political persecution, and psychological pressure on farmers. While the communist regime granted considerable privileges to party members, the concept of being an “active fighter against fascism and capitalism” became a pathway to career advancement for hundreds of thousands. Under Stalin’s influence, the ruling elite turned against some of their comrades using the Bolshevik slogan of “persecution of the enemy with a party membership card.” Prominent communists, including Traicho Rostov, the former First Secretary of the Central Committee, fell victim to these internal purges.

Leadership Transitions and Concentration of Power

In the summer of 1949, Prime Minister Georgi Dimitrov, known for his anti-fascist activities, passed away in the Soviet Union, leaving a complex legacy in Bulgarian and world history. His successor, Vasil Kolarov, also met an untimely death in February 1950. Valko Chervenkov, who spent years in Soviet exile and gained favor with Stalin, assumed the role of Prime Minister and leader of the Communist Party. Elected Chairman of the National Council of the Fatherland Front, Chervenkov consolidated power, holding sway over the entire apparatus.

The aftermath of September 9, 1944, brought about a cultural revolution and coercive agricultural changes, altering the fabric of Bulgarian society. Internal purges and leadership transitions marked a tumultuous period, setting the stage for the concentrated power wielded by Valko Chervenkov in the years that followed.