#Invidious Dominion

[randgugotur-6]

Aug 24th 2010 #MalevolentCreation released the album “Invidious Dominion” #UnitedHate #BornAgainHard #LeadSpitter #Corruptor #DeathMetal

Did you know….

The album peaked at number 26 on the Billboard 200.

[androgynealienfemme]

the linchpin of the subordination of women, the impetus and structure of women’s gendered status as second class, is sexuality, socially gendered through sexualized misogyny. We are placed on the bottom of the gender hierarchy by the misogynistic meanings that male dominant societies create, project onto us, attribute to us, which, in my observation and analysis, center on women’s sexuality. This has nothing whatsoever to do with biology, which serves, however powerfully, as sexuality’s after-the-fact attributed naturalized rationalization and supposed ratification. Sexualized misogyny merges synergistically with myriad inequalities: it sucks up and incorporates age-based specifics, takes on every racialized and caste and class guise. In other words, I reject the “single-axis” notion argued by what is currently inaccurately being called “gender-critical feminism.”

[…]

Transgender feminist theorization and realization, emerging into view but begun long ago—in a brilliant literature from Sandy Stone to Julia Serano to Esperanza—embodies a politics of its own but also sheds new light on feminist politics. All this suggests to me that “woman” is a combination of sex and gender, such that sex can be a sufficient condition for being considered a woman but has never been a necessary one. Sufficient, because most women so assigned at birth do not affirmatively identify with all women and women’s interests, or even as women really (seeing oneself as part of any group with men in it has more dignity); many (even most) are not critical of male supremacy; but all are constrained to live women’s lives, whether they see it that way or not. They are our people.

Not necessary, because not only are trans women living women’s lives—often much the worst of that life—but the transgender women I know, anyway, embrace womanhood consciously, are far more woman-identified than a vast swath of the women assigned female at birth (so-called “natal women” sometimes) whom I also know, many of whom have been trying to escape womanhood their whole lives for real reasons, yet often defend rape of other women as just a bad night and disidentify with women in every possible way short of their own transition, which is a lot of trouble and takes real courage. Trans women are, politically, women. They are our people too.

[…]

I take away two overarching lessons from these thoughts in progress. One is that feminism has not yet sufficiently changed the social meaning of gender around us for everyone to be safe and free and equal in gender terms, no matter how strongly we have confronted it or expanded it or bent it or transcended it or worked to abolish it. A lot of people still think it is biologically based. This much is truly obvious. Naturalism, that gender flows from sex in the sense of chromosomes and genitals and reproductive biology and so on, still exercises dominion over the world we all live in. Two, the feminist anti-transgender position is built on and reinforces, rather than challenges, that ideology. The notion that gender is biologically based—the philosophical foundation common to male dominant society and anti-trans feminists—is core to the reason why trans people know with their lives that they have to change their bodies to live the gender of their identities. Trans people do not need to make or defend a progressive contribution to gender politics to be entitled to change the way they inhabit gender. But trans people, in addition to all else they do and are, highlight feminism’s success—gender’s arbitrariness and invidiousness was our analysis originally—and feminism’s failure, or better our incomplete project—as the world is still largely stuck in what feminists oppose and fight to change, and trans people are determined to escape.

Babe wake up new MacKinnon essay on trans rights and feminism just dropped!!

[brightredslurpee]

An entire cavalcade of firsts

[Ao3 link]

[Pairing]: Astarion/Reader

[Rating]: Teen

[Content warning]: implied/referenced sexual assault

A precarious thing, firsts. Initiations always are. For two centuries now, Astarion had assumed the very concept entirely lost to him.

In the baptismal years of thralldom, the pieces of his previous life had flared open like a violent bloom, its discrete components bright when viewed through the newness of his subjugation. That which he had lost burned as luminous and forbidden as the very midday sun: the original color of his eyes, the simple luxury of choice, the names and faces and voices of anyone at all who might have known him when he walked still with his own blood warm in his veins. And like all blooms, the memory of these things had paled and withered beneath the cover of absolute dark. What can prosper in the tomb but the slow depredation of decomposition?

Astarion the magistrate undoubtedly had firsts aplenty. A first kiss, a first fuck. Perhaps even a first kill. All of them rotted to dust behind the stone partition of undeath, beyond any hope of recollection.

As for Astarion the vampire spawn— there must have been a first victim. A first hapless fool lured into his master’s house by a puppeteered seduction. A first blade dragged lovingly through his skin, a first boot to his face, a first squirming rodent in his jaws that might have seemed, in the wracking pangs of fledgling thirst, almost a mercy. Then another. And another. And yet another, until every agony ran together indistinct within the vast monotony of suffering, weeks to months to entire decades spent in a dull resignation that had developed like scar tissue over the invidious spread of time.

Under Cazador’s dominion, he frequently found himself operating under the illusion that it had always been thus. An interminable stretch of night, forward and back. No beginnings, no ends: only the smooth in-between of circuitous torment, and in that eternal repetition there had been no room for hope, and thus none for despair.

Then the mindflayer ship had come. And with it, an entire cavalcade of firsts.

The first tadpole ever implanted into his skull, for one. The first ragtag band of illithid survivors he’s ever felt compelled to join. The first benign touch of sunlight on his skin since his turning, first semblance of freedom in more than two hundred years, first delirious rush of autonomy, first mad grip of volition entirely his own.

Fucking hells, his first blessed mouthful of sentient blood. The rich, pure warmth of it, sweetened by the current of consciousness that courses through each swallow like alcohol through a draught of vintage Ithbank. Trepidation has a taste, it seems, as does curiosity. As does fear, as does arousal. It is on the savoring notes of the latter two that he feels your hand tug very politely at the collar of his shirt.

“Astarion.”

He ignores you with the kind of blissful disregard endemic to drunkards and dreamers alike, and relents only when you yank at the fabric nearly hard enough to rip. “Astarion,” you hiss. “Godsdammit, I’m getting lightheaded.”

“Hm? Oh yes, of course.” He wipes his mouth with the back of his hand as he gets back up, and the blood that streaks across his skin gleams like a smear of crushed ruby. "My apologies. I was simply swept up in the moment—”

“Well, learn to snap out of it,” you say rather irritably. You unstopper a vial of potion, replace the cork with your thumb, and give the bottle a quick shake. When you swipe your wet finger over the punctures in your neck, the wounds close amidst a shimmer of soft, blue light. “Or you might actually kill me next time. Which I assume will be fairly soon. Unless vampires, like leeches, only need to feed twice a year?”

Across the severance of memory, a thin strand reaches from the formless past to the inchoate present, and he recalls too late the peril of firsts.

Because a first is a flicker. An induction of sorts, and without the bulwark of experience to shore one up, it is entirely too possible to fall headlong into that chasm of nascent possibility. What lay dormant, now awakened. And since awakened, loath to close its eager eyes.

“When’ll you need it again?” you ask. “Tomorrow? Or in a week?”

When he knelt tonight to drink, it was without even the faintest hope of constancy; now that he has partaken, it is with a mouth newly blooded and an offer of repeated feedings. Frequently, even, judging from the willingness in your tone.

He would be a fool to believe it given freely.

Behind any perceived kindness lies transaction, and those who are honest spell it plain, while those who hide behind the mask of magnanimity obscure their terms behind pretty words and silent expectation. The currency too, he knows well. That which he has been forced to pay again and again through the course of centuries.

His first prostitution born of his own free will. It had to happen sometime.

“Oh, I can go a few days without, of course,” he says. “But I assume you’ll be wanting me at my best, considering the sea of goblins you seem intent on wading us through.”

“I get your point.” You dampen a rag with your waterskin and dab away the smear of drying blood on your neck. A waste. Tantamount to pouring the last precious inch of a fine Cormyr red down the gutter. “I can give you every other night. But no guarantees. And I’ll need something in return.”

An honest person, then. Having tasted the litmus of desire in your very blood, he anticipates now the inevitable demand to follow. His old instinct snaps in place, automatic as a switch.

Astarion bows. “Consider myself at your service.” He half-lids his eyes and angles his mouth to a crooked smile that curves sharp and darkly intimate, hooklike. “All of me.”

“Good,” you say. “So cover me.”

He blinks. “What? Like in combat?”

“I’ll be slower tomorrow. Weaker. I can tell that now.” You touch your newly mended neck and wince. “It’d be in your self interest too: I can’t feed you if I get skewered by a cultist— alright, I suppose technically you could get one last meal out of that, but— you get my meaning. Just… keep an eye on me.”

He waits for the rest of the request to drop. When none is forthcoming, he ventures uncertainly, “And… that’s all?”

“I can add more, if you like. Maybe lend me forty-three gold while you’re at it.”

Dilated pupils, flushed cheeks, a thin veneer of sarcasm in your voice that does not hide the fluster of averted temptation. His proposition has flown you by like a very large and ungainly bird, not unnoticed but deliberately ignored. And for once, he is content to leave it as such.

But a spawn is like an automaton— created to suit the purposes of another, and every piece of his being writ with his master’s intention. It runs in him like a mechanism, the arithmetic of seduction, and the cogs turn, the gears interlock, the cruel calculus churns in the back of his head.

You’re an easy mark if he’s ever seen one. A reticent shell that cracks with a well-placed compliment— it’d take perhaps a few drinks and an evening of strategic flirtation to break it to pieces. A touch on the shoulder, an innuendo or two. His voice so soft that you’d have to lean in close to hear him. The script rises in his throat. He has only to give it voice.

Or we might work something out to better suit our… mutual appetites.

It goes unspoken.

“That is an extremely specific amount of gold,” Astarion remarks instead.

“Gale ate my gloves,” you explain. “And the halfling in the grove drives a hard bargain.”

“I wouldn’t bother, if I were you. We’ve been turning up a veritable bounty of corpses lately. Surely one of them has a pair worth keeping.”

“What a perfectly ghastly suggestion.” You smile thinly at the scatter of weeds at your feet with the grim look of fraying moral conviction. “I’ll probably follow it. Ripeness of the corpse allowing.”

The gnaw of hunger still bites at him, visceral as a twitch. Your aftertaste lies filmy over his tongue like a retreating dream, and he licks his lips like the wretch that he is as he forces himself to step back. “If you’ll excuse me. You’re invigorating, but I need something more filling. Something four-legged,” he adds hastily, as your eyes dart from your sleeping companions, to him, and back to your companions again.

“Take care that you don’t drain a druid by mistake.” You slump back against your bedroll, yawning, yanking your pillow back into place. Trusting that the beast just an arm’s length away— beast born of appetite, beast warped beyond its own mortal recognition, beast wearing the stain of your own blood on its pale lips— won’t turn to drain you dry. An objectively stupid thing to do. Usually he meets such stupidity with little more than contempt. No longer.

“This is a gift, you know,” he says. “I won’t forget it.”

And descends back into the dark.

[metalcultbrigade]

Malevolent Creation - Invidious Dominion 24/08/2010

[onlyhurtforaminute]

MALEVOLENT CREATION-UNITED HATE

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

[AL: Canada Day coming up. A nice refresher on why we should despise John A. MacDonald, despite nobody these days needing such a reminder.] “Racisms are central to the creation of Canada through European dominance over the vast territories of the First Nations, Inuit and Métis people. A case in point is provided by John Alexander Macdonald and his enactment of Asian exclusion and the genocide of the people of the southern plains.[1]

Macdonald not only excluded the Chinese, he personally introduced biological racism as a defining characteristic of Canadianness. Biological racisms depart from older racisms by constructing allegedly natural, immutable and inescapable racial categories on the basis of supposed biological differences. Previous racisms had been based on alleged cultural characteristics that could change over time.[2] Macdonald’s fixing of difference was neither accidental nor simply the result of mere prejudice.

While debating the 1885 Electoral Franchise Act in the House of Commons, legislation he later called “my greatest triumph”,[3] Macdonald proposed that “Chinamen” should not have the right to vote on the grounds that they were “foreigners” and that “the Chinese has no British instincts or British feelings or aspirations.”[4]  When a member of the opposition asked whether naturalized Chinese ceased to be “Chinamen”, Macdonald amended his legislation to exclude “a person of Mongolian or Chinese race.”[5] The opposition object that the Chinese were “industrious people” who had “voted in the last election,” or had “as good a right [to] be allowed to vote as any other British subject of foreign extraction.”[6] This led Macdonald to make clear that Chinese exclusion was necessary to ensure European dominance.   He warned, “if [the Chinese] came in great numbers and settled on the Pacific coast they might control the vote of that whole Province, and they would send Chinese representative to sit here, who would represent Chinese eccentricities, Chinese immorality, Asiatic principles altogether opposite to our wishes; and, in the even balance of parties, they might enforce those Asiatic principles, those immoralities . . . , the eccentricities which are abhorrent to the Aryan race and Aryan principles, on this House.” He then claimed that the Chinese and Europeans were separate species: “the Aryan races will not wholesomely amalgamate with the Africans or the Asiatics” and that “the cross of those races, like the cross of the dog and the fox, is not successful; it cannot be, and never will be.” Chinese exclusion was necessary or, as he told the House, “the Aryan character of the future of British America should be destroyed . . .”[7]

Macdonald’s comments shocked his contemporaries in Parliament. He was the only member of the Canadian Parliament to use the term “Aryan” during the 1870s and 1880s, as well as the only member to argue that Asians and Europeans were separate species. The previous Canadian premier, Alexander Mackenzie, had even rejected calls for restrictive legislation on the Chinese as unseemly for “a British community,”[8] and had told the House, “To avow the principle that some classes of the human family were not fit to be residents of this Dominion would be dangerous and contrary to the law of nations and the policy which controlled Canada.”[9] When The Franchise Act reached the upper house, Senators, including some of Macdonald’s own appointments, debated whether they could get away with sending the legislation back to the House of Commons because of the invidious distinctions it enacted.[10]

Macdonald’s comments came as the final subjugation of the people of the southern plains was being completed through military force.   The subjugation of Aboriginal peoples was also a project of racialization and exclusion. Macdonald personally created the system of control over so-called status Indians that survives to this day through the federal regime of Indian Affairs.   In 1858, as Attorney General for Canada West, he introduced the Gradual Civilization of Indians Act.   Macdonald reenacted similar legislation in the first federal Indian Act of 1869, this time adding a blood quantum rule, i.e., one that removed Indian status from anyone who has only one quarter “Indian” by blood, and also requiring that women who married non-Indian men lose their Indian status. This rule directly challenged the matrilineal systems of many First Nations.   It also removed the right of First Nations communities to determine who their people were, while also allowing the government to replace traditional chiefs at the will.[11]

During the early 1880s, knowing of the dependence of the plains people on the Buffalo, whose migration had ended in 1879, Macdonald used a policy of deliberate starvation to force chiefs such as Big Bear to take treaty, while also imposing bureaucratic surveillance and control over the lives of treaty peoples through the Indian Act. In 1885, he completed the conquest of the plains through military force again the Métis and Plains Cree (remember that most of the military action was conducted by Colonel Otter again the plains Crees) and following the surrender of the plains peoples engaged in extra legal acts to ensure that those involved in the resistance would never challenge state control again. Macdonald declared twenty-seven bands to be in insurrection even though he knew that few First Nations were involved in the resistance. Innocent chiefs were arrested and imprisoned, while Aboriginal murderers were publicly executed at Battleford in contravention of the law of the time. The now conquered people were forcibly confined on reserves and were subject to an extralegal system of pass laws which prohibited them from leaving without a written pass from the Indian Agent.   He then denied rations to the people trapped on reserve, resulting in a government-organized famine.   As James Dascuk shows in his recent award-winning book, Clearing the Plains, these were deliberate acts of genocide organized by Macdonald so as to empty the plains to make them available for European resettlement.[12] Finally, as Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, Macdonald was even responsible for establishing the system of Indian Industrial Schools (i.e. residential schools) that were designed to disrupt the transmission of traditional culture while imbuing the supposed habits of European civilization in the rising generation.

Far from being the architect of peaceful progress, Macdonald pioneered some of the most ruthless practices of European colonialism and possibly the largest landgrab in the history of British colonialism.   Macdonald worked to ensure European dominance by keeping out of the country the only other group that might threaten it: Chinese land-owners in British Columbia who as he warned would otherwise have the vote and might threaten control of the House of Commons.   Thus Macdonald’s Aryan vision shaped his efforts to create a white supremacist state system, one predicated on the monopoly of racialized Europeans over state power, policies that came at the costs of the lives of the people of the plains and that brought generations of suffering to racialized Asians. These actions might be something worth reflecting upon in a multicultural Canada as we enter a period of celebrating the life of this man.”

- Timothy J. Stanley, “John A. Macdonald’s Aryan Canada: Aboriginal Genocide and Chinese Exclusion.” Activehistory.ca. January 7, 2015.

[1] See Timothy J. Stanley, Confronting White Supremacy: School Segregation, Anti-racism and the Making of Chinese Canadians (Vancouver: UBC Press, 2011) and “The Aryan character of the future of British North America”: John A. Macdonald, Chinese Exclusion and the Invention of Canadian White Supremacy,”in Patrice Dutil and Roger Hall (eds.), Macdonald at 200: New Reflections and Legacies (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2014), 92-110.

[2] Edward Beasley, The Victorian Reinvention of Race: New Racisms and the Problem of Grouping in the Human Sciences (New York: Routledge, 2010).

[3] Gordon Stewart, “John A. Macdonald’s Greatest Triumph,” Canadian Historical Review 63 (1982), 3-33.

[4] Canada, House of Commons, Official Report of the Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada (Ottawa: Maclean, Roger & co, 1885) (Henceforth, Commons Debates), 18, May 4, 1885, 1582.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid., 1585.

[7] Ibid., 1588.

[8] Commons Debates, 4, March 18, 1878, 1209.

[9] Ibid., 1262

[10] Canada, Senate, Debate of the Senate of Canada 1885, volume 2, July 13, 1885, 1276-1301 and July 14, 1885, 1326-1329.

[11] See Donald B. Smith, “Macdonald’s Relationship with Aboriginal Peoples,” in Patrice Dutil and Roger Hall (eds.), Macdonald at 200: New Reflections and Legacies (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2014), 58-93.

[12] John L. Tobias, “Canada’s Subjugation of the Plains Cree, 1879–1885,” Canadian Historical Review, 64 (1983): 519–48; James Daschuk, Clearing the Plains: Disease, Politics of Starvation and the Loss of Aboriginal Life (Regina: University of Regina Press, 2013).

[thethinghouse-blog]

Same as it ever was ... an occasional series

By the Editor

On reading old newspapers and journal articles, it is simultaneously fascinating and, frankly, depressing that the same old criticisms of museums crop up again and again. Often the complaints are eerily familiar and closely correlate with our own contemporary concerns. Take, for example, this plea for the proper (financial) recognition of the skills, experience and knowledge of museum professionals:

The poor pay of the assistants is a much more startling anomaly. They must all be men of advanced education, and many of them are men of extraordinary attainments. M. Prevost, who died some months ago, was said to have known some thirty languages, including the more rarely known Eastern tongues; yet he had only 200 [£s] a year. We merely mention his name because he is dead; we know equally strong cases of present assistants of high accomplishments who receive salaries that a clerk of a few years' standing in the Foreign Office or Treasury would reject. But we do not wish to make any invidious selection from amongst a body of men, all sufferers from the same ill-judged parsimony. People will say that if the assistants are so very clever and so badly paid, they ought to resign and take their services to a better market. The fact is, the Government take advantage of the peculiar circumstances of the case. The men who accept those situations, and who are qualified to fill them, are in the majority of cases earnest students of branches of knowledge not very popular with the paying public. In M. Prevost's case, for instance, his minute knowledge of the Chinese, Japanese, and Malay languages and dialects, was not a very marketable commodity in Paternoster Row, but it was invaluable at the Museum. Should the Directors of a National Institution take advantage of this, and offer wretched pay because to some extent they had the man in their power ? 

‘CONDITION OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM’, The Spectator, 30 July 1859. 

Source: The Spectator Archive, accessed 28 July 2018.

‘Not one person in a thousand thought of visiting them for pleasure and information.’

Here’s the view of a correspondent writing to the Editor of The Spectator on the value of providing visitors with accessible interpretation in order to enhance their enjoyment and understanding.

SIR,—Will you allow me to invite the co-operation of your readers in the movement for popularizing our museums, with a view to making the valuable collections that they contain more available for educational purposes and for the enjoyment of the people than they have hitherto been? Until recently the public seem to have considered museums as places intended only for the use of students. Not one person in a thousand thought of visiting them for pleasure and information. The majority of those who found themselves within their walls wandered listlessly from room to room, unable to appreciate what they saw, and they came away bewildered and depressed. 

In 1911 the trustees of the British Museum determined to try what could be done to remedy this state of affairs. On the advice of the director, Sir Frederick Kenyon, they appointed, as an experiment, an official guide whose duty it should be twice a day to explain and interpret, free of charge, to a limited number of visitors the priceless treasures in the various departments of the museum. The appointment of this official proved at once to be an entire success; and within a year a similar guide was appointed at the Natural History Museum. So greatly did the system appeal to the public that no fewer than fifty thousand visitors have already availed themselves of these short and popular demonstrations. It has, in fact, passed beyond the experimental stage, and has become an established institution of proved worth and importance.

[...]

Visitors, instead of aimlessly trying to extract information from labels and guidebooks, now receive it through the sympathetic medium of the human voice, and after spending an hour in an interesting and agreeable way they depart happy and contented. Objects which, under the old system, were bewildering and unintelligible, have under the new revealed to them hitherto unsuspected sequences of human thought and exemplified in ways undreamt of the tendencies of national activities.

[...]

But much yet remains to be done. The public ought not to be satisfied until the National and the Tate Galleries, the London Museum, Hertford House, Imperial Institute, and the Tower of London come also under the system, and thus the great London collections set an example to the local museums, which number over two hundred, in various parts of the country.

‘MUSEUM GUIDES’, The Spectator,  8 November 1913.

Source: The Spectator Archive, accessed 28 July 2018.

‘...the contemplation of objects [will] lead them half-way at least towards the high sphere of thought.’

Widening access and broadening audiences were also of import to the Victorian cultural authorities (if couched in rather patronising terms). Sunday opening at the Crystal Palace had proved controversial (’Objections based on the expediency of preserving a day for reflection and for calm enjoyment of existence, with a distinct and sustained reference to the Author of existence, have much force.’). Yet,

Strictly limited as it is, the proposal for a partial opening of the edifice, during a part of the Sunday, rests on the intelligible ground that the working classes cannot otherwise exchange benefits with the proprietors—cannot contribute to the revenue, nor derive the salutary influences which a visit to that collection of art and industry would give. In this respect the Crystal Palace in Hyde Park was no precedent: it was opened only for a single season, and a single day in the course of a life might well be taken by the working man; but it is to be hoped that visits to the permanent Crystal Palace may be frequent, if not habitual; and the working man, especially of the kind most likely to profit from the lesson, cannot often take a Monday.

[...]

The practical question is this—whether the classes which form the vast majority of the English people shall continue to devote themselves to the contemplation of subjects by no means exalted, namely, the amusements of beer-shops or the more squalid apathies in homes deprived by poverty and ignorance of comfort and decency; or whether they shall have the opportunity of being brought forth from those homes to the contemplation of objects which lead them half-way at least towards the high sphere of thought.

[...]

The grand thing in all questions of the kind is to go straight at the most beneficial objects; and undoubtedly the most beneficial object would be to give people as free access as possible to the rational enjoyment of the wonders of the Crystal Palace, consistently with due regard to the feelings of others and with order.

[...]

In this respect, therefore, the Crystal Palace would afford the means of effecting the largest conquest that has yet been made by rational and elevated enjoyment over the dominion of disorder and tavern-keeping debasements.

‘SUNDAY IN THE CRYSTAL PALACE’, The Spectator, 6 November 1852.

Source: The Spectator Archive, accessed 28 July 2018.

Same as it ever was, eh?

[peopleofmassachusettsquotes]

John Quincy Adams, The Duplicate Letters: The Fisheries and the Mississippi, 1822

Page 72: I do not think it necessary to inquire how far the practice of the people of Massachusetts was the practice of the whole original thirteen United States, or of the United States now, including Louisiana; or how far the immemorial usage of the people of Boston can establish a prescriptive right in the people of New Orleans. I trust I have said enough to show that prescription is inapplicable to the parties. It is also, I conceive, inapplicable to the subject.

Page 73: I do not think it necessary to inquire how far the practice of the people of Massachusetts was the practice of the people of the whole original thirteen United States, or of the United States now, including Louisiana; or how far the immemorial usage of the people of Boston can establish a prescriptive right in the people of New Orleans. I trust I have said enough to show that prescription is inapplicable to the parties.

Page 96:  By the third article of the treaty of 1783, it was agreed, that the people of the United States should continue to enjoy the fisheries of Newfoundland and the Bay of St. Lawrence, and at all other places in the sea, where the inhabitants of both countries used at any time therefore to fish; and, also, that they should have certain fishing liberties, on all the fishing coast within the British jurisdiction of Nova Scotia, Magdalen Islands, and Labrador. The title by which the United States held those fishing rights and liberties was the same. It was the possessory use of the right, or, in Mr. Russell’s more learned phrase, of the “jus meroe facilitates,” at any time theretofore as British subjects, and the acknowledgement by Great Britain of its continuance in the people of the United States after the treaty of separation. It was a national right; and, therefore, as much a right, though not so immediate an interest, to the people of Ohio and Kentucky, aye and to the people of Louisiana, after they became a part of the people of the United States, as it was to the people of Massachusetts and Maine. The latter had always used it, since they had been British colonists, and the coasts had been in British dominions. But, as the settlement of the colonies themselves had not been of time immemorial, it was not, and never was pretended to be, a title by prescription.

Page 175: That which a native citizen of Georgia or of Louisiana would have done, under the circumstances here supposed, if the right of cultivating cotton or sugar had been at stake, Mr. Russell, a native of Massachusetts, has done, in the hour of danger to her fishery. The Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Gulf of St. Lawrence, and Labrador fisheries, are in nature, and in the consideration both of their value and of the right to share in them, one fishery. To be cut off from the enjoyment of that right, would be to the people of Massachusetts, a calamity similar in kind, and comparable in degree, with an interdict to the people of Georgia or Louisiana to cultivate cotton or sugar. To be cut off even from that portion of it which was within the exclusive British jurisdiction in the strictest sense, within the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and on the coast of Labrador, would have been like an interdict upon the people of Georgia or Louisiana to cultivate with cotton or sugar three-fourths of the lands of those respective States. The fisheries of Massachusetts are here cotton plants and her sugar canes. she is not blest with the genial skies, nor gifted with the prolific soil, of southern climes; but that which nature has denied to her shores, she has bestowed upon her neighboring seas, and to them she is indebted for copious sources of nourishment and subsistence, if not of opulence and splendor, to thousands of her sons.

Page 225: It remains only to notice the painful and invidious industry with which Mr. Russell inculcates the doctrine, that because the direct and immediate interest in these fisheries was confined to the State of Massachusetts, they were therefore, of no value, either as right, or possession, to the rest of the Union. If anything could add to the incorrect moral character of this doctrine, it would be the claim of merit for enlarged patriotism and more than disinterested virtue in maintaining it. When imputing to the majority of the Ghent mission, the phantom of his own fancy, by assuming that they had rested a right to the fisheries upon prescription, among his battering rams against this windmill, is the argument that the United States, including their new acquisition of Louisiana, could not claim by prescription, a right which had been exercised only by the people of Massachusetts. The essence of this enlarged patriotic sentiment is, that a possession or liberty, the enjoyment or exercise of which is, form local causes, confined to one State, is not, and cannot be, a possession or liberty of the whole Union. For suppose prescription had been our only title to this liberty; Mr. Russell’s argument is, that it could not be the liberty of the whole Union, because, if it were, it would have been abrogated by the acquisition of Louisiana; and the point where this profound investigation lands him, is, to use his own words, that for the fishing liberty “we are consequently left without any title to it whatsoever.” 

[nitemarehoerealm]

Malevolent Creation - Slaughterhouse

[metalcultbrigade]

Em 24/08/2010, o Malevolent Creation lançava "Invidious Dominion", seu décimo primeiro álbum de estúdio. https://www.instagram.com/p/Chp7sYApM-G/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[zos-kia-kvltus]

Malevolent Creation - Target Rich Environment

[morganas-pet-blog]

Malevolent Creation - "United Hate"

[metalcultbrigade]

Em 24/08/2010, o Malevolent Creation lançava "Invidious Dominion", seu décimo primeiro álbum de estúdio. https://www.instagram.com/p/CS-TcfngMwg/?utm_medium=tumblr

[heavymetalvideos]

Malevolent Creation - Slaughterhouse from Invidious Dominion on iTunes

These guys are brutally old-school and intense. The more you listen to metal, the more you like.

Thanks to FuckingMetal for the recommendation. Make sure you follow them if you like metal!