#This guy is a criminal and has committed many a felony

[pyonicpyro]

Caramelldansen time!

[dracaelus]

Do you ever just think about how in Batman The Knight, Bruce mentions they promised to not use guns and yet Bruce is the first one to shoot Luka to protect Khoa? Especially considering his small flashes whenever he had to use guns even at inhuman targets? And he still did it?

YES!!! Yes, I do!!!

I went through this specific issue recently and i have so many thoughts, I hope you don't mind me using your ask as an excuse to ramble :)

Bruce was having such a bad time in this issue it's not even funny. Luka just decided to kill the only constant figure in his life at this point, his partner, his bestie, his boy crush, his only companion, and just expected him to sit and watch while he shot him right in front of his eyes, like, bro, right in front of the traumatized by loved ones being shot in front of him boy??? WHY

And of course that happened after months of him relieving this particular trauma repeatedly on account of having to use guns and interact daily with a guy who, bc of his past career, he couldn't help but compare to his parents' murderer. Why not, after all. Just marinate him a bit before going for the kill.

Obviously, Bruce couldn't let Luka just kill Khoa, so he takes the gun, and he doesn't even kill Luka, but taking that shot was such a difficult thing to do in such a stressful situation in which he's clearly relieving his biggest trauma. And like, sure, he made his promise to Luka, but more than that, guns are forever associated with his parents death and their murderer. Bruce very much can't use guns on real people without shaking, trembling, throwing up, yk, feeling like he's putting himself in the shoes of joe chill and feeling so intensely guilty. It’s really his last resort - if it was Bruce’s life that Luka was threatening, he might even have let himself be killed in order to not have to use the gun.

However, since the universe is not over with him yet, and still has some ideas about how to make his day worse, it decides instead to force his hand by making Minhkhoa be the one being held at gunpoint. Thus, Bruce does take the shot anyway in the worst way possible and in the worst situation ever, and literally the only thing that could've been worse would be making him kill someone, so of course,

THEN

MINHKHOA TAKES THE GUN

AND SHOOTS LUKA RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM

MAKING SO THAT BRUCE'S SHOT REALLY RESULTED IN SOMEONE'S DEATH

ONCE AGAIN

RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIS TRAUMATIZED EYES

and as if this wasn't enough

HE THEN POINTS THE GUN AT BRUCE

Honestly his biggest crime, I don't care about the murders and other felonies, this moment right here is the only thing he ever did wrong.

Like, can you imagine the level of brain damage bruce was receiving that day?

Khoa went from loved-one-about-to-be-killed to being the one walking on joe chill's shoes. His range, honestly. No wonder Bruce got so mad and then so heartbroken. Crying his eyes out, literally hugging himself. The saddest, most traumatized boy ever

Anyways, bruce still misses him, even after all khoa put him through. Or, as he says, he misses who he thought he was. After their first breakup khoa's image took a lot of damage - bruce really starts to wonder if khoa wasn't just a monster and he was the only one not seeing it. He thinks minhkhoa is sabotaging him, and that he might have killed alfred and his ex-girlfriend.

But of course nothing of this it's true and Khoa manages to undo some of the damage to bruce's opinion of him by trying to warn him about the guy actually sabotaging and trying to kill both of them (he also almost dies in the process, which i'm sure made him seem extra harmless and babygirly to bruce), so i guess that was enough to take away the thoughts of khoa being very likely to kill him one day.

He also offers a justification for the two murders he committed (Luka and master Ouahbi - honestly, what's the deal with all those criminals/ex criminals being both so good at diagnosing people with psychopathy and hating them so much????), and it was good enough for bruce, i guess? Tbh, he was mostly just trying to not think too deeply about it, 'cause he just wanted to have a little more time with him so badly. He would do so many things for khoa, and forgive him for so much stuff. HOW COULD KHOA FUMBLE HIM SO BADLY-

One thing I think about a lot is how in btk #7, bruce’s broken heart is addressed - he only references his trauma with his parents death in the issue, but the last issue ended with him saying his heart was broken bc of khoa so we can infer that he’s thinking about what happened between the two of them too. I find it interesting how this seems to be bruce’s way of dealing with khoa - he doesn't talk about him. Dick mentions it in Batman (2016) #104

And bruce never says a word about what happened between him and khoa to zatanna

I wonder if this is his way of keeping khoa with him. As he says, his heart never heals bc he doesn't let it - and so, he never talks about khoa, he only talks with zatanna about the loss of his parents, and he tells dick some of the bad khoa did to him, but doesn't delve into how important he was to him, or the good times they spent together, or how willing he was and still is to forgive him (tho he ends up showing him this part anyways when he goes to ghostmaker to ask him to coparent batman inc. with him when he first started it). He tells their story in a way that makes it seem like their separation didn't affect him negatively at all - dick only realizes bruce still misses him bc of his super powers of seeing right through bruce’s emotional barriers. But bruce keeps refusing to talk about khoa, or adress the ways in which he is still hurting, so he nevers gets better, and thus, khoa is still with him in a way, if only in wounds he left behind.

I also think bruce focuses a lot on everything bad khoa did to him and tries so hard to not even think about the good parts of their relationship bc the truth is, in his heart, the good outweighs the bad by a lot. Which is the reason why khoa barely has to do anything to win him back every time he comes back - bc despite everything, bruce has always been way too willing to forgive him for everything, and all he really has to do is to come back, and be willing to stay for a little while longer.

[ideas-4-stories]

Inspired by the "buggy gets stabbed with a seastone knife but defeats the assassin" anon and subsequent post.

Buggy really would have had SO MANY SCARS. He's immune to cuts and chops and slices. Not blunt force trauma, burns, bullets, whips, etc. Also he was a pirate apprentice on GOL D. ROGER'S SHIP!! He ate that devil fruit young, sure, but he was still a pirate before then and I highly doubt that that, nor whatever his early life was, would lead to pristine, unblemished skin.

Also - freckles. Give Buggy Freckles 2024.

Anyway, yeah, Buggy would have a MOSAIC of scars and tattoos - many of which have meanings the likes of which are lost to most. Also projection, but Buggy has a medusa tattoo somewhere on his person. Yes the one who did the tattoo for him was on the crew, and still is. Yes they are also the defacto therapist on the island. It's good pay and they get to add Names to the I'll Kill Them One Day list ((it's a whole book. With five volumes. It's on going.))

I have... an angry idea. For Buggy shrugging off seastone wounds and using his own injury as an opening. Roger would have wanted the boys STRONG but happy and safe. He saw so much of himself in Shanks that the attention was perceived as preferential treatment. Shanks was the heavy hitter with potential and skill and charisma -

Buggy was the supporting cast.

Rayleigh, unable to help Roger through the illness, through so many things, projected that onto Buggy ((Very Pearl + Connie, if you know Steven Universe, before Steven stepped in to set that record straight)). Ray would make sure Buggy was strong enough for Shanks. He put that kid through the WRINGER, and it was arguably hell. Buggy came out stronger but also far more terrified - so much so that he struggled to even utilize that strength in any true way. Rayleigh declared it a failure. Apologized to Buggy for 'failing to make him good enough'.

This did a number on him.

One thing that lasted was his frankly unsettling tolerance to water and seastone. He still works on it, and he never quite dropped it. He always has at least one seastone earring in because it's both smth he HAS to do and also it slows down his brain a little, dulling the edge of his normal panic. Like a crystal girlie but far more literal.

This isn't his first rodeo with seastone weapons either - he may have been in the East, but he was still a decently renowned criminal with a hefty bounty. He's an old hand at this!

Still hurts like a bitch though.

He'd absolutely make the dumbest puns too. "Don't worry, I'm in STABle condition! :oD"

"You need stitches, you utter buffoon."

"That wasn't very- hnn- knife of you."

"Please pass out from bloodloss."

"You cut me so deep, Hawkyyy- OW?!"

"Seas save me"

Crocodile is fighting between yelling louder, committing three felonies, laughing, and shutting the clown up. Be it by choking him or kissing him is up for debate. The doctor, used to Buggy's antics, just hands him a fidget toy. "Don't touch the wound, my supplies or try to move yet. Solve the rubix cube before you even consider getting up."

"Boring-"

"I'll tell the kitchen to make hotdogs if you do."

Buggy is now very focused on the pretty color cube.

Oh, referring to this post gotcha!

Yeah, Buggy totally would because he’s a chemist, working with all those bombs and the guy looks like he would trip sometimes while working. Buggy has to have burn scars (I’m pretty sure somewhere, someone said that Buggy has star-shaped, firework burns on his hands. Part of the reason he hides his hands away, I like that idea even that means Buggy got hurt) Now it an idea that I got when I was half-asleep, that I read in the morning with confusion… a cannonball… I don’t why my sleepy brain decided that, but now thinking about it would have to be a ricochet cannonball that he survived from (to be honest Buggy seems like a person who would survive a cannonball to the head, like some Monkey family we know) Then with probably the logical route of bullets, whips, etc… are from being hunted by marines and enemies of the Roger Pirates before he somehow blends into the background and people forgot about him.

I would say Buggy would have eaten his devil fruit around nine years old, for the AU I’m trying to writ… Also freckles… HELL FUCK YEAH!!! I love that idea; it would be so cute on him!!! Scattered all around his body, totally seen him connecting them into shapes and patterns when he’s bored and has nothing else to do.

Definably, he’s a pirate, of course he has many scars, and Buggy having at least 10 tattoos ranging from large too small. I don’t think Buggy ever has sat someone down to explain them, or maybe he has and stopped because people not understanding. Ooooooo, I look up what the Medusa tattoo means, I like to think it’s for survival and strength. With my idea for two long tattoos, I think they would be a mixture of different flowers with hidden things between them - like hidden treasure to find, those tattoos have meanings as well as some funny ones around his body as well. Because it’s Buggy, of course, he will at least have one fucking funny one.

I love an idea their defacto therapist, I think I’ve already have a OC for the job and yes, love the book called I'll Kill Them One Day list. Love that it has five volumes, you know some of those names are crossed off and it continues to grow.

This is an angry idea indeed, poor Buggy… as we see that Buggy is not supporting cast, with his followers (they are like cult followers in a way) and his crew. Basically pushed to the side for Shanks to be the one in the spotlight as the “leader” of the two (I definitely doubt that Shanks didn’t look up to Buggy during sometimes when they were cabin boys)

Oh fuck, no wonder why Buggy hasn’t talk to Rayleigh and makes my idea of them meeting as cold and awkward. Like Rayleigh would greet with nicknames from long ago, expecting the same as what he remembered last of Buggy, only to have Buggy to greet him coldy. Either, with Dark King Rayeleigh or Slivers Rayleigh instead of nicknames that he use to call Rayleigh.

Why…why projected his problems onto Buggy! Like of course that did a number on Buggy, ecspeaily after Ray apologized to Buggy for ‘failing to make him good enough’... You can’t say that to a fucking child, you know they will think it’s all their fault! I mean look at Buggy, he already has enough problems with his self-esteem, he doesn’t need anymore!!!

Poor Buggy, going thtough hell because Rayleigh wants him strong like him to keep Shanks safe because he’s being as stupid as Roger. It makes sense that Buggy can’t use his strength because of being afraid and worrying so much (Buggy is definitely a worry-wort)

I agree with Buggy has an high tolerance to water and seastone, I mean Buggy seemed to of been a really good swimmer from how angry he is from Shanks scaring him and making him swallow the Bara Bara fruit (if not, then it’s a headcanon for me that he’s a really good swimmer before he swallowed the devil fruit) You think he would just stop going into the water? I mean I can see Buggy finding those small pools of water on a beach… I forgot what they are called, anyway you think he wouldn’t go in them to feel the sea? I think Buggy would.

Oooooo a seastone earring or some other type of seastone jewelry on his body. That’s interesting, I’ve never thought about it. The seastone helps him corrals his chop chop powers from doing all the time as well. Calming his brain, dulling the edge of his normal panic is a clever way, bro probably found how much seastone he needs to do so. From this post, Buggy has to have some edibles mixed into brownies or some other type of pastry (it’s now a headcanon for me) Dude has to have some drugs to calm down with the stress that Crocodile and Mihawk have put him through.

Yeah, it's definitely not Buggy’s first rodeo with seastone weapons, I can see Buggy being hunted by people during the time after Roger was killed and I see that’s the time where most of his seastone wounds came from. I wonder now if Buggy hordes the seastone weapons that people attacked him with?… I’ve decided yes, Buggy would keep them.

I stand for Buggy making the dumbest and baddest puns when he is hurt, especially when he gets attacked by seastone weapons. It takes his mind off of the pain they give him (Also the banter between Buggy and Mihawk you made is chefs’ kiss)

Both Crocodile and Mihawk just being done with Buggy and quite disturbed by how Buggy handles his pain. Mihawk wants him to shut up and sit still, while Crocodile is fighting between screaming, committing felonies (like he hasn’t committed felonies more than enough), laughing his ass off, then wanting to either choke Buggy or kiss him to shut the clown up. That’s so them, and Buggy is getting a little shit like always.

This doctor is just like the doctor OC; Kuo-Lee, I’ve created to be the Buggy Pirates medic. Really, being done with what Buggy does and uses things to keep him still. This is so right, handing him a fidget toy, saying that if he is good than he’ll tell the kitchens to give their captain is favorite food. Yeah, that will make Buggy sit as still as he can, to be honest, Buggy isn’t one to sit still.

[vacantgodling]

Blorbo Felony Bingo

Your blorbos have committed so many crimes. That's what makes them a blorbo. It wasn't their fault, obviously.

Which crimes exactly?

Rules: mark off the felonies that your blorbo has committed (not necessarily been convicted of)

thank you @sarahlizziewrites for tagging me :DDD

the thing that makes the sense is to do amon because he's a criminal LMAO. also he's really just a glorified serial killer on the dl at this point cuz most of his crime is just yknow. battery and murder.

the reason there's the shrugging guy over identity theft is because like TECHNICALLY speaking amon using 'coriandrum farrah' as an alias is 'identity theft' but he's also like... stealing his own identity... in some ways. its kinda weird so like technically he has but also not really. depends on how you look at it.

i'll leave this as an open tag show me your criminals!

[anns-works]

Jay, Lloyd and (and Morro) Things.

The Trenchcoat Adventure™.

On the same week as that, they crashed into a stranger's meet up to thank them for being understanding enough that night when working as a cashier. Making their day.

Like literally, so many late night snack runs...

Introducing Lloyd to the League Of Jay was the best (kid got a chance to be a kid again) and the worst (they forgot how much of a gremlin he used to be) thing Jay did.

Lloyd took up art with Scott by graffitiing the walls of Cliff Gordon's mansion.

Once Jay and Lloyd disappeared off the face of the earth and everyone started panicking cuz they thought they got kidnapped. Found them two weeks later on the other side of the continent after Lloyd called saying Jay was in the hospital. Turns out he had a severe allergic reaction after the café they were having brunch at messed up their orders and put peanuts in his food.

Disappeared off the face of the earth AGAIN. But this time they came back a week later in their crumpled PJs looking like they got mauled by a feral racoon in a forest. A freshly revived Morro in tow.

Kai, having several breakdowns: GUYS WHAT THE FUCK-

Jay: Kai, chill. We got a guy who came back from the dead and is probably very understandably confused right now. Do you really wanna do this?

Kai, full on having a stroke: I'M-

Morro, vibing: Hey, is that ice cream.

On that note, never let these three be in a room together.

Jay and Lloyd are chaotic sure but with Morro they just lose all sense of morality and are down to commit multiple felonies at a moment's notice.

Jay and Lloyd: I'm just a silly little guy :)

Morro: *exists*

Jay and Lloyd: Ok its time to commit war crimes

Morro himself doesn't have to do anything, like he'll enter the room and his mere presence will be enough to trigger these bozos into committing arson. He's actually pretty chill.

Jay: I wanna add one of the ninjas into the League

Scott: Yeah, no. Not gonna happen

Jay: *sends a pic of Lloyd*

Scott:...Ok I'm willing to make an exception cuz they look very polite

Jay managed to convince Morro and Lloyd to help him mess w/ Zane's audio output and the next month they spent dealing with what was an increase of hostility towards the nindroid from the criminals.

Villain of the week: Hahahaha! I've got you now ninjas!

Zane, in a weird mesh of a australian and californian accent: You thought so smurf now get ready to eat this bread you thoty square!

Villain of the week: what the fuck

Also these guys in Trip (ninjago tumblr) are the best thing ever.

@ living-in-htis-windy-pain (Morro): This guy was declared dead abt a couple of months ago and today I get this message from him.

[Image description: Jay throwing a peace sign at the camera. He has white hair and pink-blue dual colored eyes. There is a blurry figure of Lloyd in the background staring at the camera. The caption reads "i lived bitch". End description.]

@ living-in-htis-windy-pain (Morro): i just started a 30-days free trial on having a normal life.

@ zappy-traffic-violation (Jay): where's the link?

@ thepoweroffriendship (Lloyd): WHERE'S THE FUCKING LINK OP?!?!?!

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The S&L crisis perfected finance crime

When the Great Financial Crisis hit, suddenly there was a lot of talk about the Savings & Loan crises of the 1980s and 90s. I was barely a larvum then, and all I knew about S&Ls I learned from half-understood dialog in comics like Dykes to Watch Out For and Bloom County.

As the GFC shattered the lives of millions, I turned to books like Michael W. Hudson’s THE MONSTER to understand what was going on, and learned that the very same criminals who masterminded the S&L crisis were behind the GFC gigafraud:

https://memex.craphound.com/2011/03/07/the-monster-the-fraud-and-depraved-indifference-that-caused-the-subprime-meltdown/

Hudson’s work forever changed my views of Orange County, CA, a region I knew primarily through Kim Stanley Robinson’s magesterial utopian novel PACIFIC EDGE, not as the white-hot center of the global financial crime pandemic.

https://memex.craphound.com/2015/01/15/pacific-edge-the-most-uplifting-novel-in-my-library/

That realization resurfaced today as I read the transcript of UMKC Law and Econ prof Bill Black’s interview with Paul Jay on The Analysis, when Black says, “Orange County is the financial fraud capital of the world, not America, the world.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFH5-5D5_Lc

Black is well-poised to tell the tale of the S&L crisis. He served as a bank regulator during the crisis, and his notes on the “Keating 5” meeting were the turning point for public and Congressional attention to the crime:

https://theanalysis.news/economy/the-best-way-to-rob-a-bank-is-to-own-one-bill-black-pt-1/

In 1998, he finished a criminology doctorate at UC Irvine (in Orange County!) on the S&L frauds, entitled “The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One,” a title he used for his 2005 book (updated in 2013) on the scandal:

https://utpress.utexas.edu/books/blab2p

The S&L crisis shares a lot in common with today’s financial crimes, but it had one key difference: ultimately (with Black’s help), more than 30,000 criminal referrals were made against the bankers involved in the crisis, and more than 1,000 were convicted of felonies.

The story of the S&L crisis is both a roadmap for holding finance criminals to account (a roadmap we threw away and forgot about) and a roadmap for committing gross acts of financial crime with impunity (which the finance sector studied carefully and keeps close its heart).

Black calls finance a “crimogenic environment,” in where deregulated institutions become pathogenic, “like a cesspool that produces lots of bacteria and viruses and such and causes lots of infections.”

The S&L crisis began with the Carter-Ronald deregulatory blitz. Both presidents assumed that because S&Ls (a kind of bank) in California and Texas were doing really well after deregulation, that meant CA and TX had nailed it and their example could be expanded nationwide.

In reality, the rosiness of the California and Texas S&Ls’ books was the result of “control fraud,” when a person who controls the bank is stealing from it.

Black likens this to a homeowner who commits insurance fraud — an ultimate insider, who knows the code to de-activate the alarm system and also knows just where the most valuable items are kept.

The major control fraudster of the S&L crisis was Charles Keating, a “top 100 granter” who was among the 100 highest donors to Reagan and Bush I. Keating has stolen a vast fortune from Lincoln Savings, and he was able to trade some of that loot for political cover.

Keating hired Alan Greenspan (!) to lobby for him, and Greenspan suborned five senators (the “Keating Five”) who threatened regulators with dire consequences if they didn’t stop digging into S&Ls.

This was also a priority for Reagan, whose plan for vast tax-cuts for the wealthy might stumble if it the public found out that the US government needed billions to bail out these walking-dead fraud zombies.

Reagan turned to Ed Gray, a PR guy, to run the S&L operation. Gray was hand-picked by the S&L’s trade association, and they told him flat out that he was there to make S&Ls look good — not to blow them up by investigating their balance-sheets.

The problem is that Gray — who was a hardcore Reaganite partisan and deregulation true believer — was honest, and the fraud was so obvious. The Texas S&Ls were originating fraudulent loans to build housing tracts that didn’t exist.

When Gray went out to look at these building sites, he just found endless rows of desolate concrete pads — he called them “Martian landing pads” — and abandoned ruins. These were the collateral on billions in loans!

Gray is a believer in sound finance, and this is undeniable evidence that deregulation has led to catastrophically unsound practices, so he starts imposing regulation on the S&L sector.

Keating pulls strings to sideline Gray, but Gray keeps pushing. Keating gets the leadership of both parties in the House to sponsor legislation ordering him to stop. He keeps going.

Donald Regan — an ex-Marine who went from CEO of Merrill Lynch to Reagan’s Chief of Staff — leans hard on Gray, but Gray won’t stop.

The Office of Management and Budget swears out a criminal complaint against Black for closing too many S&Ls. He won’t stop.

They go after Gray’s guy in Texas, Joe Selby, a former acting Comptroller of the Currency with impeccable credentials, demanding that Gray fire Selby. Democratic Speaker Jim Wright says Selby should be fired because he’s gay. Gray won’t budge.

Homophobia turns out to be a powerful weapon for criminal impunity. Keating sued Black and the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, claiming the bank’s gay employees had conspired against Keating because Keating was an evangelical Christian.

Gray took finance crime seriously. He had two priorities: one, eject anyone committing fraud from working at any financial institution, and; two, criminally and civilly charge those former execs and take back all the money they stole and ruin them financially.

Black and colleagues took this to heart, making thousands of criminal referrals. When law enforcement refused to act on these, they started publishing their referrals, and newspapers published stories about how none of these criminal referrals were leading to prosecutions.

Gray eventually gets sidelined by a “team player,” the disgraceful Danny Wall, who studiously ignores all the crime that has been uncovered. But then Bush I replaces him with Tim Ryan, whose marching orders are to root out finance crime.

Ryan ultimately made over 30,000 criminal referrals over the S&L scandal, and brought prosecutions against elite criminals, including Neil Bush, the son of the President of the United States of America.

Black: “Tim Ryan sacrificed his career for the public knowingly…he’s been unemployable since.”

And as for Bush I, his first major legislative priority became the removal of financial crime from the jurisdiction of independent watchdogs, so this would never happen again.

This is as far as the interview gets (it’s part one of nine!), but it’s already answering some of the most important questions the Great Financial Crisis raised, like, “Why didn’t any of the bankers who stole trillions from the world go to jail?”

Image: Dykes to Watch Out For strip #90 (1990), “The Solution,” Alison Bechdel https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3908728&userid=99998&perpage=40&pagenumber=10

[susiephone]

i want to talk to you about the musical “cats”

(i know i’ve just lost half of you)

and the band the mechanisms

(there goes 75% of the remaining half)

jonny d’ville, lead singer of the mechanisms, is known to have committed every crime ever, except for the sexual ones

this will immediately catch the attention of anyone familiar with “cats,” as macavity the mystery cat is known to have broken every human law, including the law of gravty

now, i know what you’re thinking: macavity is jonny’s fursona

but no

i think it’s weirder than that

you see, in the song named after macavity, we learn that the titular mystery cat is known to the scotland yard

and not as a nameless, faceless criminal, because whenever they reach the scene of the crime, they always say

“macavity’s not there”

this suggests that macavity not only has a reputation, but is known to be a housecat

this begs the question: how

how the fuck did a housecat become london’s most notorious criminal and bane of the scotland yard

well, let’s delve into the backstory, shall we?

one of jonny d’ville’s many crimes would, of course, be framing someone else for his activities

(remember: he’s committed every non-sexual crime ever. this would’ve happened at some point. and he’s immortal, so he’s had time.)

i propose that his designated fall guy was one who never saw it coming

one who trusted jonny

one who loved jonny

his pet cat and accomplice, macavity

macavity probably started as a lookout and bag man for jonny, possibly been held in contempt of court for refusing to testify against him

but one day, he found himself in over his furry little head, and found out that his beloved owner jonny, had pinned multiple crimes, including murder, arson, and felony tax evasion, on him

macavity was declared sentient enough to stand trial, and was convicted, while jonny got away scot-free in his spaceship, the aurora

macavity languished in prison for years (serving nine life sentences), and his anger turned to stone-cold hatred

soon, he was fulfilled and sustained by one simple goal: revenge

so macavity eventually made a prison break, and began his true criminal career in earnest

the scotland yard soon realizes who’s behind the sudden rash of violent crime in london, but they can never prove anything, because wherever the crime was committed, macavity wasn’t there

macavity soon becomes the personal archnemesis of at least a couple detectives

what they don’t know, however, is that all of macavity’s crimes are ultimately simply a means for him to earn money

money for a big purchase

a galactic purchase

money to design, commission, and build himself a spaceship with a full crew and enough fuel to catch up to the aurora, which has the crew/band the mechanisms aboard, including the captain first mate

macavity’s former friend turned traitor and nemesis

jonny

d’ville

this is a theory that was concocted by myself and @oneshortofapenny​, and is proof we shouldn’t be allowed in a zoom call together, though i would also argue that this is at least partially jonathan sims’ fault, and absolutely andrew lloyd weber’s fault

but it doesn’t matter because we have SOLVED this ANCIENT CONSPIRACY and finally answered the age old question of “is macavity a furry?”

one day, jonny will be aboard the aurora, preparing for bed, when the door behind him creaks open

and he just hears the damning meow from the darkness

“i knew this day would come”

he turns around slowly to face his doom

and macavity’s

not there

(p.s., macavity’s crew are warrior cats.)

[cluescorner]

It’s Disbarment Day come get y’all’s comfort.

- Trucy was truly Phoenix’s light in every conceivable way. She can make him smile like nobody else and uses Mr. Hat to give double hugs to her Daddy. Whenever Phoenix can’t bring himself to leave his home, Trucy pesters him into taking her out for ramen or ice cream. She was the sole thread that kept him hanging during the first few days of his disbarment, the only thing really keeping him tethered to the world around him. She was what kept him going even during his darkest times. 

- After Miles heard what happened, he nearly broke international laws trying to make his way back to Phoenix as soon as possible. And the moment he arrived, he held Phoenix and refused to let go. He made sure that Phoenix knew just how wonderful he was and how much Miles appreciated him. Phoenix figuratively and literally saved Miles’s life several times, and Miles repeats one of those incidents every time that he can tell Phoenix’s thoughts are getting the better of him. Afterwards, he becomes the foundation of his family’s financial state. As a prosecutor, he makes enough money to support his family in every way they need and more. He moves in with Phoenix and Trucy, bringing Kay and Sebastian along with him, until Phoenix has a part-time job that affords him enough money to make rent. 

- Sebastian teaches Phoenix how to play piano. Though Phoenix may be woefully inadequate, Sebastian is patient and a better teacher than many would expect. While they practice, they talk about everything. Sebastian tells Phoenix about the time he nearly caused a mistrial for a dangerous criminal and tried to help his father get out of murdering someone, Phoenix regales Sebastian with tales of his courtroom antics and the Matt Engarde situation. They have heart-to-heart talks with each other about everything from relationship drama to feeling inadequate to whether it’s a ladder or a step-ladder. The bond Phoenix forms with Sebastian helps him remember that he’s not alone in feeling set up for failure or betrayed, giving him a person who genuinely understands how Phoenix feels. 

- Kay keeps Phoenix moving. She gets him out of bed, takes him to ‘stakeouts’ (secretly an excuse to get free help on heists), and brings him to whatever local events interest her. Kay knows that constant activity and stimulation help her get out of depressive slumps, so she figures that the same would help her new dad(?) keep himself going. Though Phoenix isn’t quite cut out for tree-climbing and running through the mall after Kay commits felony theft, her antics certainly make sure that Phoenix is never left with nothing to do. Her joy from the most minor things (seeing a cool looking rock on the beach, learning how to use a pottery wheel, or even just walking through town) helps Phoenix see that there are little things in life that are worth living for, even if it’s only a dog on a skateboard. 

- Franziska VonKarma is pissed. She is pissed because Phoenix Wright is a fool for not checking that his evidence was authentic and she is SUPER FREAKING pissed that someone would frame him for this. Franziska drops everything she is working on and flies to that foolish country to give every fool within a 100 mile radius a piece of her mind. She is the first to actually tell Phoenix that she knows for a fact that he would never submit forged evidence, that she would stake her life and her name on it. Franziska tears through the bar association and the prosecutors’ office alike. Once she has calmed down, she helps Phoenix prepare to retake the bar exam, even before he was found to be innocent of forgery. Seeing even Franziska support him, Phoenix began the fight to prove his innocence. And after the truth behind the Enigmar trial was exposed, Franziska was the first person to begin procedures to have Phoenix reinstated. 

- Gumshoe may not be the smartest guy, but he knows how to help people find part time jobs. He helps Phoenix with his search for jobs and offers to write personal recommendations for him, though Phoenix rejects this offer. Gumshoe and Maggy also help Phoenix work through how it feels to get fired, with Maggie being especially helpful by teaching him how to joke about it. 

- Ema knew from the very beginning that Phoenix was innocent. So when he started asking for weird devices, she never asked why. When he asked for her help developing a camera for the Mason System, she quickly made it her top priority. She’s not great at offering comfort or emotional support, but she’s an excellent problem-solver. It was her idea to have Phoenix wear the camera in his beanie and she helped develop the Mason System from a technical perspective. 

- Maya and Mia had a fight over who got to talk to Phoenix first. In the end, Maya won out. She was crying before even he was and kept repeating that he would never do something like this. She had half a mind to channel the spirit of Magnifi or Zak or anyone in order to prove Phoenix’s innocence, but he convinced her not to. So instead she finally paid him back for all of the times he took her out for burgers, taking him out for them instead. She would talk about whatever they usually talked about, trying to make everything seem as normal as possible. And it worked. Maya was one of the very few constants in Phoenix’s life, so having her by his side made everything feel just a little more normal. 

- Mia dropped her ‘an attorney always smiles’ act and lets Phoenix cry to her about everything. She reminded him that she was always there for him, just a channeling away, and that her belief in him was set in stone. She believed that he would get through this and come out better for it, and thus Phoenix believed it. 

- The people in Phoenix’s life are what give him hope and happiness and light every single time. Every time that he felt pushed to the brink, someone would  keep him from falling. But in the end, he was the one who decided to keep going. To become a lawyer again and keep facilitating justice, regardless of what had happened in the past. Everyone else helped him along his way, but Phoenix was the one who chose to keep going every single time. And he’s proud of that. 

[enbycarp]

Transcript of the last image with links:

What you just read was written by Mariame Kaba.

Support and donate to her organization, Project NIA, a grassroots organization with a vision to end youth incarceration.

Listen to her tell the people’s history of prisons on the Intercepted podcast.

Read the article “What Abolitionists Do” on Jacobin by Dan Berger, Mariame Kaba, and David Stein.

The rest of the transcript below the cut:

Yes, we mean

Literally Abolish the Police

Written by Mariame Kaba for New york Times Opinioon

Mariame Kaba is, in her own words, and organizer, educator and curator. Her work focuses on ending violence, dismantling the prison industrial complex, transformative justice, and supporting youth leadership development

We can’t reform the police.

The only way to diminish police violence is to reduce contact between the public and the police.

There is not a single era in United Sates history in which the police were not a force of violence against black people.

Policing in the South emerged from the slave patrols in the 1700 and 1800s that caught and returned runaway slaves.  In the North, the first municipal police departments in the mid 1800s helped quash labor strikes and riots against the rich.  Everywhere, they have suppressed marginalized populations to protect the status quo.

So when you see a police officer pressing his knee into a black man’s neck until he dies, that’s the logical result of policing in America.

When a police officer brutalizes a black person, he is doing what he sees as his job.

Now two weeks of nationwide protests have led some to call for defunding the police, while others argue that doing so will make us less safe.

The first thing to point out is that police officers don’t do what you think they do. They spend most of their time responding to noise complaints, issuing parking and traffic citations, and dealing with other non-criminal issues.  We’ve been taught to think they “catch the bad guys; they chase the bank robbers; they find the serial killers,” said Alex Vitale, the coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College, in an interview with Jacobin.  But this is “a big myth,” he said.  “The vast majority of police officers make one felony arrest a year.  If they make two, they’re cop of the month.”

We can’t simply change their job descriptions to focus on the worst of the worst criminals.  That’s not what they are set up to do.

Second, a “safe” world is not one in which the police keep black and other marginalized people in check through threats of arrest, incarceration, violence and death.

Regardless of your view on police power--whether you want to get rid of the police or simply make them less violent--here’s an immediate demand we can all make: cut the number of police in half and cut their budget in half.  Fewer police officers equals fewer opportunities for them to brutalize and kill people.  The idea is gaining traction in Minneapolis, Dallas, Los Angeles and other cities.

After the 1967 urban uprisings, the Kerner Commission released a now-familiar set of recommendations, like working to build “community support for law enforcement” and reviewing police operations “in the ghetto, to ensure proper conduct by police officers.”

These commissions didn’t stop the violence; they just served as a kind of counterinsurgent function each time police violence led to protests.

Calls for similar reforms were trotted out in response to the brutal police beating of Rodney King in 1991 and the rebellion that followed, and again of the killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner.

The final report of the Obama administration’s President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing resulted in procedural tweaks like implicit-bias training, police-community listening sessions, slight alterations of use-of-force policies and systems to identify potentially problematic officers early on.  But even a member of the task force, Tracey Meares, noted in 2017,

“policing as we know it must be abolished before it can be transformed.”

The philosophy undergirding police reforms is that more rules will mean less violence... but police officers break rules all the time.

Look what has happened over the past few weeks--police officers slashing tires, shoving old men on camera, and arresting and injuring journalists and protesters.  These officers are not worried  about repercussions any more than Daniel Pantaleo, the former New York City police officer whose chokehold led to Eric Garner’s death; he waved to a camera filming the incident.  He knew that the police union would back him up and he was right.  He stayed on the job for five more years.

Minneapolis had instituted many of these “best practices” but failed to remove Derek Chauvin from the force despite 17 misconduct complaints over nearly two decades, culminating in the entire world watching as he knelt on George Floyd’s neck for almost nine minutes. 

Why on earth would we think the same reforms would work now? We need to change our demands. The surest way of reducing police violence is to reduce the power of the police, by cutting budges and the number of officers.

We are not abandoning our communities to violence. We don’t want to just close police departments. We want to make them obsolete.

We should redirect the billions that now go to police departments toward providing health care, housing, education and good jobs. If we did this, there would be less need for the police in the first place.

We can build other ways of responding to harms in our society. Trained “community care workers” could do mental-health checks if someone needs help.  Towns could use restorative-justice models instead of throwing people in prison.

What about rape? The current approach hasn’t ended in. In fact most rapists never see the inside of a courtroom. Two-thirds of people who experience sexual violence never report it to anyone. Those who file police reports are often dissatisfied with the response. Additionally, police officers themselves commit sexual assault alarmingly often. A study in 2010 found that sexual misconduct was the second most frequently reported form of police misconduct. In 2015, The Buffalo News found that an officer was caught for sexual misconduct every five days.

When people, especially white people, consider a world without police, they envision a society as violent as our current one, merely without law enforcement--and they shudder.

As a society, we have been so indoctrinated with the idea that we solve problems by policing and caging people that many cannot imagine anything other than prisons and the police as solutions to violence and harm.  

People who want to abolish prisons and police, however, have a vision of a different society, built on cooperation instead of individualism, on mutual aid instead of self-preservation. What would the country look like if it had billions of extra dollars to spend on housing, food and education for all?  This change in society wouldn’t happen immediately, but the protests show that many people are ready to embrace a different vision of safety and justice.  

When the streets calm and people suggest once again that we hire more black police officers or create more civilian review boards, I hope that we remember all the times those efforts have failed.

[latenightsleuth]

Alert! Not for Weak Hearted People! How Do Serial Killers Choose Their Victims?

Serial killings often appear to be entirely random at first – each victim may have something in common that only the killer quickly recognizes...Often there is no rational explanation in why a person chooses a particular victim. Some have a scenario playing out in their mind, and it's all about situations that suit their fantasy than a specific victim type. Others kill people who demeanor anger them.

For example, H.H Holmes, who is generally believed to be the first known serial killer in the world, began to kill people to steal their property. During the World's Columbian Exploitation, held in Chicago, he built a hotel of horrors to lure and kill guests.

The Term: Serial Killer

As a prototype idea, the notion of serial killing is better understood.

The most unusual type of homicide is serial killing, which happens when a person has murdered three or more individuals who were previously unknown to him or her. Serial killers, however, are responsible for a significant number of these unsolved assassinations.

Some of the known killers are H.H. Holmes, David Berkowitz, West, Fred. Related mental growth disorders affect multiple serial killers. They also seem to be above-average intelligence wise, and for some of these guys, it is in some ways as if killing acts like a drug.

The majority of serial killers who live alone are not reclusive social misfits. They are not monsters and do not seem unusual. Inside their families, many serial murderers hide in plain sight. Serial killers also have families and homes, are gainfully working, and seem to be regular community members.

What Motives Do The Serial Killers Represents?

The only reasons that have come to be understood so far are frustration, anxiety, financial gain, and finding attention, desire, power, etc. In the needs and aspirations of serial murderers, there is a tremendous variety that leads them to extinguish others' lives. In a serial murder case, the motive can be complicated to ascertain since one can have several reasons for committing his or her crimes.

Some of the murders who were deserted by their families were David Berkowitz, Joel Rifkin and many more. Whereas if the murderer is all about some psychosexual stimulation, then he would typically try to locate victims to whom he is drawn. In the annals of criminal history, Andrei Chikatilo is the most ruthless serial killer who sexually abused, killed and mutilated at least fifty-two women and children.

Even counted among the fears, as mentioned in previous texts, when H.H Holmes was made to confess about his killings. One of the reasons was being bullied during his childhood which exorcised him of his fears about death.

Also Read About: Belle Gunness(Black Widow): Most Known Women Serial Killer, Killed her Children & Suitors! Know Why?

Who Are The Victims?

It is one of the least 'answered questions when it comes to what the forms of victims are. Some of their tastes are a mix of what victims are available, usable and attractive in terms of how serial killers pick their victims, while some of the killers are more comfortable waiting for the "right" and highly desirable victim to come along.

Many serial killers have a deep compulsion to commit acts of violence. However, they are believed to have been conscientious people who won't pick a victim if they know they are very likely to succeed. This is why a prostitute or homeless person is most often the first perpetrator; anyone who kills will strike without paying attention...

It is known that Mr Frederick and Mrs Rosemary West committed at least 12 murders. Many of the casualties of the West have been swept up by the wayside. Most of them were rebellious and difficult teens from dysfunctional families, but not all. West was motivated by sexual gratitude, including abuse, torture, and mutilation, and all the dismembered corpses in the Wests' Cromwell Street garden, known as 'House of Horrors,' were usually buried there.

Conclusion:

It's always a felony to kill or threaten to kill. Since not everyone has the psychology of being one of the many serial killers, the motivations or other known reasons such as rage, desire, strength, on the other hand, could lead someone down the wrong direction.

Someone may be a serial killer because, in his adolescence, he is traumatized, while someone is a killer because it gives him comfort. Not many incidents of serial killing are seen or should be identified, but it is a matter of being vigilant not to become a victim of the same.

Read full article: https://www.thesocians.com/post/how-do-serial-killers-choose-their-victims

[abolitioncommunism]

“Congressional Democrats want to make it easier to identify and prosecute police misconduct; Joe Biden wants to give police departments $300 million. But efforts to solve police violence through liberal reforms like these have failed for nearly a century.

Enough. We can’t reform the police. The only way to diminish police violence is to reduce contact between the public and the police.

There is not a single era in United States history in which the police were not a force of violence against black people. Policing in the South emerged from the slave patrols in the 1700 and 1800s that caught and returned runaway slaves. In the North, the first municipal police departments in the mid-1800s helped quash labor strikes and riots against the rich. Everywhere, they have suppressed marginalized populations to protect the status quo.

So when you see a police officer pressing his knee into a black man’s neck until he dies, that’s the logical result of policing in America. When a police officer brutalizes a black person, he is doing what he sees as his job.

Now two weeks of nationwide protests have led some to call for defunding the police, while others argue that doing so would make us less safe.

The first thing to point out is that police officers don’t do what you think they do. They spend most of their time responding to noise complaints, issuing parking and traffic citations, and dealing with other noncriminal issues. We’ve been taught to think they “catch the bad guys; they chase the bank robbers; they find the serial killers,” said Alex Vitale, the coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College, in an interview with Jacobin. But this is “a big myth,” he said. “The vast majority of police officers make one felony arrest a year. If they make two, they’re cop of the month.”

We can’t simply change their job descriptions to focus on the worst of the worst criminals. That’s not what they are set up to do.

Second, a “safe” world is not one in which the police keep black and other marginalized people in check through threats of arrest, incarceration, violence and death.

I’ve been advocating the abolition of the police for years. Regardless of your view on police power — whether you want to get rid of the police or simply to make them less violent — here’s an immediate demand we can all make: Cut the number of police in half and cut their budget in half. Fewer police officers equals fewer opportunities for them to brutalize and kill people. The idea is gaining traction in Minneapolis, Dallas, Los Angeles and other cities.

History is instructive, not because it offers us a blueprint for how to act in the present but because it can help us ask better questions for the future.

The Lexow Committee undertook the first major investigation into police misconduct in New York City in 1894. At the time, the most common complaint against the police was about “clubbing” — “the routine bludgeoning of citizens by patrolmen armed with nightsticks or blackjacks,” as the historian Marilynn Johnson has written.

The Wickersham Commission, convened to study the criminal justice system and examine the problem of Prohibition enforcement, offered a scathing indictment in 1931, including evidence of brutal interrogation strategies. It put the blame on a lack of professionalism among the police.

After the 1967 urban uprisings, the Kerner Commission found that “police actions were ‘final’ incidents before the outbreak of violence in 12 of the 24 surveyed disorders.” Its report listed a now-familiar set of recommendations, like working to build “community support for law enforcement” and reviewing police operations “in the ghetto, to ensure proper conduct by police officers.”

These commissions didn’t stop the violence; they just served as a kind of counterinsurgent function each time police violence led to protests. Calls for similar reforms were trotted out in response to the brutal police beating of Rodney King in 1991 and the rebellion that followed, and again after the killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner. The final report of the Obama administration’s President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing resulted in procedural tweaks like implicit-bias training, police-community listening sessions, slight alterations of use-of-force policies and systems to identify potentially problematic officers early on.

But even a member of the task force, Tracey Meares, noted in 2017, “policing as we know it must be abolished before it can be transformed.”

The philosophy undergirding these reforms is that more rules will mean less violence. But police officers break rules all the time. Look what has happened over the past few weeks — police officers slashing tires, shoving old men on camera, and arresting and injuring journalists and protesters. These officers are not worried about repercussions any more than Daniel Pantaleo, the former New York City police officer whose chokehold led to Eric Garner’s death; he waved to a camera filming the incident. He knew that the police union would back him up and he was right. He stayed on the job for five more years.

Minneapolis had instituted many of these “best practices” but failed to remove Derek Chauvin from the force despite 17 misconduct complaints over nearly two decades, culminating in the entire world watching as he knelt on George Floyd’s neck for almost nine minutes.

Why on earth would we think the same reforms would work now? We need to change our demands. The surest way of reducing police violence is to reduce the power of the police, by cutting budgets and the number of officers.

But don’t get me wrong. We are not abandoning our communities to violence. We don’t want to just close police departments. We want to make them obsolete.

We should redirect the billions that now go to police departments toward providing health care, housing, education and good jobs. If we did this, there would be less need for the police in the first place.

We can build other ways of responding to harms in our society. Trained “community care workers” could do mental-health checks if someone needs help. Towns could use restorative-justice models instead of throwing people in prison.

What about rape? The current approach hasn’t ended it. In fact most rapists never see the inside of a courtroom. Two-thirds of people who experience sexual violence never report it to anyone. Those who file police reports are often dissatisfied with the response. Additionally, police officers themselves commit sexual assault alarmingly often. A study in 2010 found that sexual misconduct was the second most frequently reported form of police misconduct. In 2015, The Buffalo News found that an officer was caught for sexual misconduct every five days.

When people, especially white people, consider a world without the police, they envision a society as violent as our current one, merely without law enforcement — and they shudder. As a society, we have been so indoctrinated with the idea that we solve problems by policing and caging people that many cannot imagine anything other than prisons and the police as solutions to violence and harm.

People like me who want to abolish prisons and police, however, have a vision of a different society, built on cooperation instead of individualism, on mutual aid instead of self-preservation. What would the country look like if it had billions of extra dollars to spend on housing, food and education for all? This change in society wouldn’t happen immediately, but the protests show that many people are ready to embrace a different vision of safety and justice.

When the streets calm and people suggest once again that we hire more black police officers or create more civilian review boards, I hope that we remember all the times those efforts have failed.”

[rachelbethhines]

Tangled Salt Marathon - One Angry Princess

There’s two halves to this episode. The first is a well constructed, if over simple, mystery for the kiddos to solve. The other is a failed attempt at being ‘deep’ and ‘mature’.  

Summary: Attila is finally opening up his own bakery, but people generally don't want to stop by because of his scary helmet. The next day, Monty's Sweet Shoppe is destroyed, and Attila is arrested. He is about to be banished from the kingdom, but Rapunzel makes an appeal to investigate the matter further. 

The Episode is Meant to be a Homage to 12 Angry Men, but Misses the Point of the Original Film

So for those who haven’t seen the movie, (though really you should) 12 Angry Men is about a jury trying to decide if an accused person is guilty of a violent crime. At first the evidence seems clear, but one lone juror refuses to vote guilty until the evidence has been gone over again. One by one he convinces the other men to vote not guilty as they each have to face they’re own personal biases.

Sound familiar? 

In the show Rapunzel is the sole believer in Attila’s innocence despite evidence to the contrary. She insists on investigating herself while challenging everyone else’s personal biases. 

The difference?

12 Angry Men is a hard hitting look at how privilege, prejudice, and cognitive bias can interfere with the American judicial system. None of the jurors are named, but they are all middle class, presumably Christian, white guys. And that is the point. They are all different from the accused; a young, poor, arguably non-white teen (the play is intentionally vague about the kid’s race so that you can slot any minority in there) who has a history of getting into trouble. If you were to change the ethnicity, race, gender, class, or age of any of the 12 characters then you would suddenly have a very different story. It’s their backgrounds and pre-formed opinions that inform their decisions. Even the main protagonist is not exempt from re-examining his own personal biases. 

Meanwhile the writers of Tangled: the Series are too busy showing off how clever Rapunzel is to actually deal with the themes of injustice and bigotry that they added in themselves in the first place.

Rapunzel Knowing Attila Before Hand Weakens the Message

In 12 Angry Men none of the jurors know the accuse. In fact, they can’t know him. It’s against the law. In order to have an impartial jury, no one can have any ties to either the defendant or the prosecution, and they must not have knowledge of the case or have had specific experiences that might cause them to be biased or unfair. 

Rapunzel being Attila’s friend means that she already has her own bias and an invested interest in making sure Attila goes free. She’s not acting out of the simple goodness of her heart here. She’s doing something that directly benefits herself. 

I don’t expect a children’s fantasy show to recreate the US judicial system with all of the complexities there in, but I do expect it to uphold it’s heroine as the selfless person it claims her to be. Yet the show constantly undermines this supposed character trait by only having her help the people she befriends, and only if that help doesn’t require anything emotionally challenging or mentally taxing from her.   

How much more powerful would this episode be if Rapunzel was defending a stranger or someone she actively disliked? Imagine if it was Monty who was being accuse and Raps had to swallow her pride in order to do what is right. But that would require the show having Rapunzel actually learn something instead of placing her on a pedestal. It would also mean giving Monty a reason to exist rather than keeping him around to be a convenient red herring.      

Rapunzel Shouldn’t Have to Prove Attila’s Innocence 

Rather than have a courtroom drama the show opts to have a ‘whodunit’ story instead. This unfortunately gives the implication that Corona’s judicial system runs on a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ mantra, which is backwards to any humane legal system. ‘Innocent until proven guilty’, ‘reasonable doubt’, ‘due process’, are the cornerstones of our modern social ethics. 

In 12 Angry Men, we never find out if the accused actually committed the crime or not. That is because his actual innocence isn’t the point of the story. It’s about whether or not the system is working like it should or if it’s being compromised by human error. 

Once again, I don’t expect a recreation of the US judicial system, but if you’re writing a story for a modern audience then you need to reinforce modern morals. Simply crouching Corona’s legal system as ‘of the times’ or ‘fantasy’ while ignoring why we no longer have such systems in place reduces the story to puerile fare. 

It also means that show’s writers didn��t put enough thought into their world building. 

No One Calls Out the Obviously Corrupt System 

The show has interwoven throughout its ongoing narrative themes of classism, injustice, abuse, and authoritarianism, but then fails to follow through on those themes by not having any of the protagonists actually examine any of these issues. They just sit there in the background, even as the show tries it darndest to present Rapunzel as an arbiter of reform. However a person can’t bring about change if they can’t even admit that there is a problem to begin with.   

In this episode alone we have

Banishment is considered a reasonable punishment for an act of vandalism. A crime that is usually considered only a misdemeanor unless the damage goes over a certain amount. Keep in mind that not even most felonies would be given such a punishment in the real world

Introduces the prison barge that regularly carries away convicts. In the past ‘undesirables’ would be shipped off to prison colonies as a form of persecution. Attila and every other person we see subjected to Corona’s legal system are of a lower class. 

Many prejudge Attila based off his appearance, lower class, and past upbringing. However, it is either Attila who is expected to change or Rapunzel who is expected to win people over. At no point is anyone told that they shouldn’t be prejudiced to begin with. 

There is no judge, jury, or lawyers. The king alone decides the fate of criminals, the Captain is expected to be the both the prosecutor and the ‘executioner’, which is a conflict of interest, and the defendant has no one to represent them unless they so happen to know a kind statesperson. Meaning you have to be either rich or well connected in order to even have a chance to defend yourself. 

Oh and there’s this...

Uh, yeah you do. You’re the flipping king. You make the law. You’re the one to bring charges against Attila, and nearly every other criminal in the show, in the first place. 

The show constantly wants us to view Frederic as simply an everyman who is only doing his job, but he’s not. He’s a ruler and as such he has powers and responsibilities that no one else has or ever will have. The series gives both him and Rapunzel all of the privileges of being in charge without holding them to account for the consequences of their actions. 

By not pointing out how wrong these actions are, the show winds up avocating them instead. When I call Tangled the Series authoritarian, this is why. Because authority is never questioned even when clearly wrong and nepotism is presented as the solution to conflicts as oppose to being the problem itself.

The Show Introduces Complex Issues but Then Oversimplifies the Conflicts Surrounding Those Issues

The creators of the show have constantly declared that the series is ‘not for kids’. That they were shooting for an older audience than the pre-school time slot they were given. Now ignoring the fact that Tangled was always going to have a built in audince of pre-teen girls and ignoring that children’s media can be mature, TTS lacks the nuance needed to viewed as anything other than a pantomime. 

As stated before, this episode alone ignores the very real issues interlaced within the conflict in order to give us an overly simple mystery that anyone over the age of five could figure out.  

It’s frustrating to watch the show constantly skirt towards the edge of complexity only to see it chicken out and go for the low hanging fruit instead. As a consequence the series winds up being for no one. Too shallow for adults and older teens, but too confused in its morals to be shown to small children and younger adolescents. 

I wouldn’t recommend this show to a parent, not without encouraging them to view the series either before or alongside their child in order to counteract it’s ‘lessons’ and I know parents within the fandom itself who’ve stopped showing newer episodes to their kids; stating that they want their child to be old enough to point out the harmful messages to before doing so. 

Once Again No One Learns Anything 

Rapunzel doesn’t learn that the system is flawed. Attila doesn’t learn to open up to people. Nobody learns to treat people with respect and to not judge others based on appearances alone.

The whole point of the episode is to just show off how much ‘better’ Rapunzel is than everyone else. The show constantly feels the need to tear down other characters in an effort to make its favs look good as opposed to just letting the mains grow as people. 

Conclusion

Tangled the tv series is no 12 Angry Men. It’s no Steven Universe/Gravity Falls/Avatar:TLA/She-Ra/Gargoyles/Batman:TAS either. It barely reaches the same level as the likes of DnD, Sonic SATAM, or Voltron. Interesting ideas but poor pacing, build up, and lack of follow through, with some naff decisions thrown into the mix bring things down in quality. And unlike the Dungeons and Dragons cartoon from the early 80s, TTS lacks the benefit of being a pioneer in the field of animation, where such flaws are more forgivable. 

[pittarchives]

His Old Tribulations, Our Current Struggle: Remembering Garner in the Current Call to Reform Cannabis Laws

This post was written by Warner Sabio Sr., Graduate Student, Jazz Studies, University of Pittsburgh.

Recently, on April 7th, Virginia’s legislature passed a bill legalizing the possession of small amounts of marijuana, making it the 16th state to do so. Under Virginia’s law, adults can possess an ounce or less of marijuana beginning July 1. Several weeks before, New York passed the Marijuana Regulation and Taxation Act, legalizing the recreational use of marijuana in the state. New York’s legislation also expunges the records of people convicted on marijuana-related charges that are no longer criminalized. These two drug-policy reforms concerning marijuana are a few of the many looking to respond to the disproportionate and often tragic impact previous legislation has had on communities of color.

For Erroll Garner, the drug policies regarding marijuana and the enforcement of those laws affected him personally and professionally. On January 26, 1946, Garner was arrested in Los Angeles and charged with violating section 11500 of the California Health and Safety Code—a felony at the time. The State accused Garner of possessing “flowering tops and leaves of Indian Hemp (Cannabis Sativa)” and set bail at $500. According to dollartimes.com, adjusted for inflation, $500 in 1946 is equal to $7,156 in 2021. An excessive amount, it seems, for the non-violent crime he was accused of committing. Nevertheless, on April 10, 1946, Garner pled guilty to the charge and was sentenced to 90 days in the county jail. This incident would mark Garner as a felon and a “dope addict,” in the problematic wording of the language that circulated in press accounts. The distinction would continue to cast its shadow and haunt the pianist for at least another decade, if not the rest of his life.  

(Above) Page 1, (Below) Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, and Page 11 from folder “Erroll Garner Personal,” Erroll Garner Archive, 1942-2010, AIS.2015.09, Box 3, Folder 18,  Archives & Special Collections, University of Pittsburgh Library System. 

Six years later, after a performance at Mack’s Tavern in Atlantic City on September 12, 1952, the pianist was again arrested and brought up on charges surrounding a marijuana-related drug bust. According to The Baltimore Afro-American, Garner was held “for failure to register as a convicted addict under the state’s narcotics registration law and not for being an actual user of narcotics.”[1] The conviction referred to by New Jersey law-enforcement authorities was based on Garner’s 1946 Los Angeles arrest, which he reportedly informed authorities of at the time. Interestingly, Garner, convicted of possessing marijuana in the initial Los Angeles case, was now branded a “dope addict” in press coverage revolving around the Atlantic City incident.

(Above) Image of the article from The Baltimore Afro-American, Sept. 13, 1952.

The headline on the front page of September 13, 1952, Pittsburgh Courier read: “ARREST ERROLL GARNER FOR DOPE.” The subhead for the article noted that Garner was “Part of Big-Time Roundup.” The lede stated:

ATLANTIC CITY – Erroll Garner, Pittsburgh’s significant gift to jazz and dexterous piano-playing, was nabbed here in a post-Labor Day roundup of alleged dope addicts and suspects.”[2]

(Above) The Pittsburgh Courier, Sept. 13, 1952.

The Courier also reported that forty-one other suspects were also arrested. One of those arrested included Garner’s roommate and valet, Frank (Tons) Randolph, who was accused of “being a dope peddler.” The Afro-American reported Randolph “was placed under $25,000 bail after two witnesses testified in Municipal Court on Monday that they bought marihuana in $10 and $20 lots from him.” According to dollartimes.com, adjusted for inflation, $25,000 in 1952 is equal to $245,730 in 2021. From the reports, it does not appear that authorities found any weed on Garner or Randolph. Nevertheless, it seems the testimony was enough to warrant the arrests.

It is also interesting to note that the Courier report hinted at a possible ulterior motive for the arrest.  Perhaps stemming from the practice of racial profiling of Black men driving nice cars, the paper reported, “police are alleged to have stated that Garner has been driving around Atlantic City in a 1952 Cadillac and a woman, described by some as his wife has been driving a Chrysler.”

In a follow-up story on September 20, The Afro-American interviewed Garner about the arrest. The headline read: “GARNER SHRUGS OFF DOPE COUNT ARREST: ‘Just One Of Those Things,’ Pianist Says of Shore Incident.”[3] Garner discusses the Los Angeles case in the piece, affirming his conviction (saying it took place in 1943) and stating he was “sentenced to 45 days to an honor farm.” Garner elaborated:

“It was all a ‘frame.’ I was turned in by a fellow whose job I took in a night club in which I was playing. The guy was salty and squealed. But I am not complaining because it did happen. At the time, I was a youngster and went around with a bunch of wild guys.”

(Above) Headline from The Baltimore Afro-American, Sept. 20, 1952.

As for the Atlantic City incident, Garner was quoted as saying he “was through with that kind of stuff now” and had “too much to lose.” However, he was critical of the publicity, stating, “the only thing is that I was the least involved and got most of the publicity. This is one time that I wished I was digging ditches.”

Almost a month after the Atlantic City arrest, on October 11, 1952, The Afro-American reported that Garner was fined $50 for failure to register as a dope addict.[4] The case was thereafter dismissed, and Garner “filed the necessary registration forms in compliance with the local ordinance. According to the paper, the incident had left Garner feeling “disturbed” and “embarrassed.” Garner was forced to cancel several weeks of bookings “in order to permit him to rest” because he was “suffering from nervous exhaustion.” As for Randolph and the others arrested that night, my limited search came up empty as to how they fared.

On Jan.17, 1953, the Courier reported that a case involving Garner’s arrest in St. Louis on New Year’s Eve was tossed. Garner was charged with possession of narcotics.[5] The paper said, “Garner’s case was thrown out of court because the officers did not have a warrant when the arrest was made.” Garner’s attorney, however, clarified that the basis of the arrest was “a crank telephoned St. Louis police that the pianist had carried narcotics from New York to St. Louis in his automobile. It was revealed that Garner had arrived in this city by plane.”

For Pittsburgh-born Garner, professional success could not shield him from the insatiable appetite to punish that has driven much of the nation’s drug policies for decades. Major players in the formation of these early policies are uniquely linked to Garner geographically. Harry J. Anslinger, who served as the first commissioner of the U.S. Treasury Department’s Federal Bureau of Narcotics, was an Altoona, PA native. Pittsburgh’s-own Andrew Mellon, the uncle of Anslinger’s wife, appointed him to the post. Mellon, at the time of Anslinger’s appointment, was the Treasury Secretary.

According to The Economist:

“The drafters of the Harrison Act of 1914, the first federal ban on non-medical narcotics, played on fears of ‘drug-crazed, sex-mad negroes.’ And the 1930s campaign against marijuana was coloured by the fact that Harry Anslinger, the first drug tsar, was appointed by Andrew Mellon, his wife’s uncle. Mellon, the Treasury Secretary, was banker to DuPont, and sales of hemp threatened that firm’s efforts to build a market for synthetic fibers. Spreading scare stories about cannabis was a way to give hemp a bad name. Moral outrage is always more effective if backed by a few vested interests.”[6]

According to law professor Michael Vitello, “while the Harrison Act did not include a prohibition against marijuana, its framework would become the model for Congress’s first efforts to criminalize marijuana.”[7]

(Above) Harry J. Anslinger served as the first commissioner of Treasury Department’s Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Image from the Associated Press. 

Driven by stereotypes, some framers of early U.S. drug policies linked the usage of both marijuana and cocaine to marginalized communities and racialized “fringe groups like pimps, prostitutes, and day laborers” and “uppity Southern blacks and race-mixing drug parties.”[8]  Concerning Anslinger’s beliefs, Vitello states:

“Finding racist quotations attributed to Anslinger is easy and a reminder of how ingrained racist language was in this country. Here are a few choice quotations: “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men”; “Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows and look at a white woman twice”; and “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”[9]

These antiquated and racist beliefs would vibrantly pulsate through the heart of drug laws for generations. Unfortunately, Garner’s experience was not isolated or rare. For Garner, the arrests and court cases must have been taxing. His experience speaks for many people caught up in the web of draconian drug laws pervading the justice system. The growing frustration has led to calls for change.

As previously mentioned, recent efforts have yielded changes to drug policy concerning marijuana across the United States. To date, sixteen states, two territories, and the District of Columbia have legalized small amounts of marijuana for adult recreational use. Twenty-seven states have decriminalized weed, meaning, “small, personal-consumption amounts are a civil or local infraction, not a state crime (or are a lowest misdemeanor with no possibility of jail time).”[10] However, more needs to be done to undo the gross injustice that lopsided enforcement has produced. It is a flawed system of policies and laws that impacted Garner then and thousands today. We must resolve the discordant tones struck by the framers of foundational drug war policies, the effects of which still resonate and impact civil society today.

Works Cited

Erroll Garner Archive, 1942-2010, AIS.2015.09, Archives & Special Collections, University of Pittsburgh Library System.

“Arrest Erroll Garner For Dope: Pianist Part of Big-Time Roundup.” Pittsburgh Courier (Pittsburgh, Pa.), September 13, 1952: 1.

Bender, Steven W. “Joint Reform? The Interplay of State, Federal, and Hemispheric Regulation of Recreational Marijuana and Failed War on Drugs.” Albany Law Environmental Outlook 6, no. 2 (2013): 359–.

“Errol Garner Case Thrown Out of Court.” Pittsburgh Courier (Pittsburgh, Pa.), January 17, 1953: 1.

“Errol Garner Pays $50 Fine: Failed To Register As Dope Addict.” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), October 11, 1952: 9

“Garner Shrugs Off Dope Count Arrest: ‘Just One Of Those Things,’ Pianist Says Of Shore Incident.” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), September 20, 1952: 3

Gootenberg, Paul. Andean Cocaine: The Making of a Global Drug. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2008.

“‘How did we get here?’ A Survey of Illegal Drugs.” Economist, July 28, 2001, p. 4. The Economist Historical Archive, 1843-2015 (accessed April 13, 2021). https://link-gale-com.pitt.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/GP4100323851/ECON?u=upitt_main&sid=ECON&xid=779492d4.

“Pianist Under Bail For Not Registering As Addict; Shore’s Raids Called Biggest.” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), September 13, 1952: 1

National Conference of State Legislatures website, https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/marijuana-overview.aspx

Vitiello, Michael.  “Marijuana Legalization, Racial Disparity, and the Hope for Reform.” Lewis & Clark Law Review 23, no. 3 (2019): 789-822.

[1] “Pianist Under Bail For Not Registering As Addict; Shore’s Raids Called Biggest,” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), September 13, 1952.

[2] “Arrest Erroll Garner For Dope: Pianist Part of Big-Time Roundup,” Pittsburgh Courier (Pittsburgh, Pa.), September 13, 1952.

[3] “Garner Shrugs Off Dope Count Arrest: ‘Just One Of Those Things,’ Pianist Says Of Shore Incident,” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), September 20, 1952.

[4] “Errol Garner Pays $50 Fine: Failed To Register As Dope Addict.” Baltimore Afro-American (Baltimore, Md), October 11, 1952.

[5] “Errol Garner Case Thrown Out of Court.” Pittsburgh Courier (Pittsburgh, Pa.), January 17, 1953: 1.

[6] “‘How did we get here?’ A Survey of Illegal Drugs,” Economist, July 28, 2001.

[7] Michael Vitiello,  “Marijuana Legalization, Racial Disparity, and the Hope for Reform,” Lewis & Clark Law Review 23, no. 3 (2019), 794.

[8] Paul Gootenberg, Andean Cocaine: The Making of a Global Drug, Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2008, 193.

[9] Vitiello,  “Marijuana Legalization,” 799.

[10] National Conference of State Legislatures website, https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/marijuana-overview.aspx

[trishvaylar]

In seven seasons of the Blacklist we have seen a lot of Blacklisters, not all of them were villains, most of them had personal reasons, and many of their stories appealed to our empathy. Of cause there were some very bad types (an evil hag Lady Ambrosia, whom I hated, but she only had one episode). But there was one character who I both despised, loathed, and whose downfall I waited for more then any other's (even Fakerina's, because she was at least a victim once) - Tom Connelly.

As I wrote once already, the psychology of this show is perfect, so if my hunch tells me something is wrong, then something is definetely amiss.

We first encounter Tom Connolly in Season One, Episode 15, the Judge. He once was a federal prosecutor who ordered Harold Cooper to beat a prisoner. Yes, the guy turned out to be very guilty, but Tom Connolly showed then that he was always unscrupulous when it came to his carrier interests. That for me was the first bell.

In Season Two mister Connolly started doing favoures for Harold Cooper, but, even though he always said it was friends doing favoures for each other, he always had an agenda of his own. And he never was loath to say he had no principles or was ready to hold something (like the case of the harbourmaster's death) over Cooper's head. But his alligence was stated clearly at the end of 02.19, Leonard Cohl, when the Director commends him for betraying a friend. But only at the very end of the season the depth of his betrayal becomes trully clear to us: for a season (approximately a year) he made Harold Cooper think, believe he was dying. He pushed Harold's wife into commiting a felony, he planned to destroy the lives of all the Task Force members, not unlike Berlin, but for a very different reason - to be a valuable member of the Cabal. Interestingly enough he wanted to frame Liz as Masha Rostova, a Russian sleeper agent, daughter of notorious spy legend Katarina Rostova, not as a daughter of the FBI most wanted list criminal Reymond Reddington. Curious, that is. And the moment when he pushes Liz, telling her what they plan to do with people she loves, he looms as the kind of monster who has no heart (even the Director had a human weakness, his wife).

I am not a bloodthirsty person, but boy did I wish Liz to end him for all he has done, but especially for torturing Cooper for so long... Because I believe that friendship is sacred and one who betrays a friend is scum. That is who Tom Connolly really was, scum.

#The Blacklist #Rumble #Tom Connolly #One who I wanted dead #Red #Liz Keen #Harold Cooper #What I believe is unforgivable is to betray a friend

[ms-demeanor]

Thanks for answering my ask, but I wasn’t really asking about the actions of the black bloc/violent protestors at a given protest. What I want to know is if this actually works in any larger sense - cause it seems mostly like it’s just a weird kind of performance, gesturing at full armed rebellion but never going there and never actually effecting change. And like, I accept that I’m a fool for wanting nonviolent change, but I’m not sure the presented alternative does much better?

Now, it’s not really discussed in that article (only vaguely touched on when they mention that the anarchists showed up early for the counterprotest) but based on the timing of certain tweets and calls to action it’s pretty clear that the march fizzled because Andrew Aglin couldn’t get people to show up when there was already a large group of counterprotesters who had made it clear they were not going to respond to violence with nonviolence.

Alt-right protests and marches before Charlottesville didn’t have such clear uniforms and tactics - the khakis-and-polos along with sticks and shields are a fairly clear (to me) indication that the white supremacist organizers saw black bloc as a tactic worth preparing against.

The KKK didn’t fear the hippies. They feared the Black Panthers.

In 2017 20 states saw bills to limit protesting put before their legislatures. Thankfully not many of them passed, but a few did.

These bills varied in their terms, a few naming masks and facial coverings as being a problem but most of them focused on something else: blocking roads.

THAT’S the tactic that these states think is too extreme - blocking the road.

You know, that thing those protestors in Hong Kong were doing. That thing that a bunch of folks online are praising for being “polite” and “classy” and that Hong Kong’s police commissioner is calling a riot.

Here’s the thing, if you’re asking “does black bloc” work you’ve kind of got to ask “does any protest work?”

What does protest accomplish?

About six million people marched at the Women’s Marches in January of 2017. Did they accomplish their goals?

I’m going to say, just from the rollbacks on trans protections and widespread bills that erode abortion protections, “no.”

Now, that doesn’t mean that their mission is complete and that they didn’t hit the mark and decided that “eh, one day of pussy hats was good enough.” They’re still working.

But is it doing anything?

That’s really hard to say.

Also, I’d like to point out that while the Women’s March was praised for its nonviolence commentators were quick to point out how rude and lewd their signs were and how much trash was left behind.

Which is why a lot of anarchists react to the question of “does black bloc accomplish anything” as a form of tone policing that’s almost meaningless.

Black bloc forms up and protects nonviolent protesters and carries injured people away from riot cops. Someone punches a white supremacist and it becomes a meme. All antifa are violent thugs, they’re the real fascists because they want to limit speech through violence.

Black Lives Matter and Occupy Wall Street and Labor Day marches block freeways to protest violence and inequality. They part for ambulances, someone breaks a window. These leftists don’t have any respect for people who are just trying to live their lives and get to work; they care more about burning trashcans and breaking windows than they do about the workers they claim to protect - what if it was a black woman who owned that starbucks that they damaged in their riot, did they ever think of that?

The women’s march is full of speakers telling deeply personal stories, individuals reaching out and offering care and comfort to one another, and even a few stories about how well these protestors can get along with the police; we’re not so different after all! But wow, a lot of their posters had genitals or sexual slogans on them, and they left behind a lot of trash. This isn’t appropriate for children, and if they care about the environment so much why are they littering? What a bunch of nasty, shrewish women. They’re just mad that Hillary lost.

You say:

it seems mostly like it’s just a weird kind of performance, gesturing at full armed rebellion but never going there and never actually effecting change

and I’m going to have to say that all protest is performance. Protests aren’t about *doing things* they’re about showing up and being seen in support of an idea. And I do think that protest accomplishes some things; it lets people know they aren’t alone, it raises awareness of issues. Those are fine things.

As to the armed insurrection bit - well, have a tremendously ironic image:

That sign, being held by a navy veteran, says “if you need violence to enforce your ideas then your ideas are worthless.”

I don’t think you could have a clearer image of the concept of “the state monopoly on violence” than a military veteran chiding protesters for throwing rocks at cops and breaking windows.

The article that featured that photo shows a fascinating tension. You’ve got people at a peaceful protest saying “we’ve got to make sure the nazis know they can’t just show up and spew their hate” who don’t seem to realize that the nazis showed up in spite of the peaceful protest and were chased away by a black bloc. You’ve got the alt-right protest organizer failing to do her paperwork (typical; if your protest fizzles you can always say “the city would’t give us a permit” or “there were logistical problems” instead of “I couldn’t get more than twenty guys to commit to showing up”). My favorite bit of the article is where they admit that police were overwhelmed by antifa and that thirteen arrests were made and there were 6 people injured, two of whom were taken to the hospital. Man, for an out-of control bunch of thugs hellbent on punching nazis that’s some admirable restraint.

So there’s this conflict I’ve got. On the one hand a pretty goddamned big part of me *wants* armed insurrection against, for instance, the police. The police kill people with impunity and I think it’s a gigantic problem, especially considering the issues that we have in the US with white supremacists “infiltrating” the police and military and such.

On the other hand if you’re driving your reinforced bulldozer into an old lady’s house because she used to be married to the mayor who wouldn’t grant you a permit for your muffler shop you’re not exactly part of the solution.

Getting back to insurrection:

One of the things that I DO think black blocs accomplish is to get people to question the legitimacy of the state’s monopoly on violence. The nonviolent clergy could have been badly beaten while the cops looked on impassively except that a bunch of ballsy motherfuckers decided not to let that happen. And some of them got arrested for it. People went to protest Donald Trump’s inauguration and a bunch of protesters got injured after there was some property damage - but there was also video of police targeting people who were helping street medics and of of people protecting injured people from the police. THAT I think is valuable, the illustration that you can do the right thing even if it is illegal. I think that’s effective and I think it’s heroic.

Anarchists have been debating the value of violence as a mover for social change for, like, a hundred years. You’ll note that we’re not dealing with assassinations or bombings in this discussion, but punching a few guys. Like, seriously, this is something that is very contested among anarchists and that individuals feel conflicted about even within themselves.

But, like, black bloc isn’t generally an “armed” insurrection unless you count baseball bats.

Here’s the deal: in my ideal world every time the alt right showed up with twenty dipshits talking about a white homeland there would be ten thousand peaceful protesters there with kazoos buzzing their nonsense away. (Credit where credit’s due; I think I saw this concept articulated this way by tumblr users argumate and pervocracy before I started using that phrasing myself) Actually one of my favorite kind of protests is simply drowning out the bullshit or making it appear ridiculous. Wanna see one of my heroes?

undefined

GOOD JOB. DIRECT ACTION. FUCK YEAH.

Making nazis look ridiculous is almost as memeworthy as punching them in the face and much more palatable to the wider public. Also the nazis FUCKING HATE IT. Hard to be taken seriously with your talk about white genocide when you’re backgrounded by the baby elephant walk.

(god, seriously, everyone go get electric kazoos and mini amps and practice bagpipes, you don’t have to be good at it you just have to be loud)

If you want nonviolent change over time I recommend looking into Food Not Bombs; they’re doing good, nonviolent work that they still get arrested for and that hasn’t really made a dent in policy since they were founded in 1980.

I don’t think you’re a fool for wanting nonviolent change. That’s what I want too. But honestly all of the alternatives look kind of shit right now. You’ll get just as arrested for throwing a milkshake at someone as you will for nonviolently blockading a courthouse. Six million people peacefully marched to support reproductive rights and we’re still looking at the possibility of seeing Roe V. Wade overturned. Journalists covering the J20 protests were charged with felonies (until charges were dropped), maybe a simple assault charge for decking some asshole isn’t that bad.

But until we do figure out something that works I’m not gonna shit too hard on the only tactic that has been proven to suck the fun out of being a nazi.

Because remember - it’s not really the government that black bloc is deployed against; it’s the fascists for whom that the government provides no impediment.

(oh also a general reminder that most direct action is criminalized: be a good anarchist and feed hungry people in your community today)

[prorevenge]

Boy meets girl

I often pressed V for information on how she earned income but she would give conflicting answers about grants and scholarships until one day.... About 6 months after our first meeting, she finally tells me and IT. IS. NOT. GOOD. I was interviewing at a professional school when I receive the call, she's in trouble, BIG TROUBLE, and needs my help. She tells me she earns money by doing others' assignments for them. $200 to write a paper and $800 to complete an online class, usually a 100 level introductory course. She describes the method she uses to circumvent the ITs detection of others completing others assignment and how her client wasn't doing his part to copy/paste and submit from his own computer. He is failing the course and blames her. He threatens to turn her in. Her plan is to refund his money and wants me to 'follow him to see if he goes somewhere alone and take his phone' because that has all the evidence of their communications. HOLY SHIT! SHE WANTS ME TO COMMIT STRONG ARMED ROBBERY, a FELONY for her! I'm not going down for this or with her and I know nobody would believe me. ENTER: military experience - if there's no record, it didn't happen. So, I agree to help her, somehow, as soon as I return to town. I go to V's dorm the next night and she shows me EVERYTHING. Her list of clients, their blackboard passwords, how she meets them, how she defends them during honor code violations, etc. So I tell her not to worry, I'll handle everything on the day she refunds his money. Relieved, she goes to bed but before she lays down I ask to use her computer for on assignment and she says "sure do whatever you want". In my state, if you let someone use your electronics, its called "having privilege" and anything you do with their computer which may harm them is legal as if it your own computer. So, I took screenshots of her conversations with her clients, I open google settings and screenshot all the blackboard users and passwords stored on her computer. I go to her messenger and screenshot their conversations. Back home, I compiled our recordings and saved our facebook conversations. A week later, I made up an argument about an upcoming New Years Party and broke up with her. Then sat on the information I had on hand for 2 more weeks thinking about what I should do.

I remembered how she has a history of arrests from high school to freshman year for stealing from outlet malls and selling their loot online. Never formally charged. She, of course, omitted this from her application into professional school. How she admitted "finding a mark" and using them to pass her courses. How she denigrated others who were completing courses through hard work. How she used her position as honor council to get her friends out of trouble while helping to expel others for doing exactly what she was doing. How she cheated on me multiple times, used me, manipulated me, tried to make me commit a felony and ruin my life. SHE HAD TO BE STOPPED.

Knowing she was friends with the faculty on the honor council, they often bought each other gifts, I had to go above their heads. I gave names and descriptions of the events to my program director. He then goes to the honor council, anyway. I was called into the honor council's head office of "Corrupt Administrator" CA. CA tells me I should delete the information I have because it could become a civil matter and I should consider my "self preservation." She schedules another meeting with me a week later. I return and she asks if I want to make a statement about V. Guess what I said, I tell her "no, I deleted everything and I don't remember" because I was in the military and I know how to 'play ball' when superiors tell you to shut your mouth. But the most important reason I decided to not file against V directly was due to the fact I was applying for a military scholarship to pay for professional school. Since I did not follow through, the program director filed an honor code violation complaint against V on a date [suggested by CA]. A month later they tell me their investigation was inconclusive and they will close the case due to the director waiting 1 day too long to file according to the school's academic policy. CA set us up! However, since the director used my name as a source, they must notify V because students have rights to know their accusers. FUCK.MY.LIFE. CA fucked me and ruined any chance for a case against V based on a technicality. Now I fear for my safety because V tried to get me to strong arm rob someone now I just implicated a dozen cheaters who have as much as her to lose. CA schedules a meeting with V and tell her about an ongoing investigation and tells her she will be kept up-to-date. I know the investigation is over and now they are just doing formalities. V requests the information of the investigation and they promise to email it to her. V calls me for support even though we aren't together. She is crying and talking about killing herself. She tells me her dad had been paying for her college this whole time and starts coming clean with other lies. I feel bad and almost regret everything. Maybe she is not a sociopath, maybe she is really sorry. She stays at my house the next few days, I'm watching her trying to keep it together. THEN HER FUCKING CLIENTS START COMING TO MY HOUSE. She is still doing their assignments! She NEVER LEARNS!

Finally she gets the investigation info and there's my name. She calls me 130 times in 3 days, sends her friends to my classes to tell me to come to her house, finally I do. But I don't go into her room because she will trap me. She takes my phone so I can't record. She tries to get me to sign a paper saying I fabricated everything and its all false. I tell V, "They already closed the investigation, you wont get in any trouble why should I implicate myself and get in trouble? It wont solve anything!" And she pleads, "Do you still love me?" I shake my head and walk out. Two days later, police are waiting at my house to serve a 72 hour emergency protective order (EPO) commanding me to stay away from V. I know what she is up to. She is trying to get me to violate the protective order, discredit me, and send me to jail. Its very easy to lie to create one and lie to say it was violated.

NOW ITS NOT JUST REVENGE TIME, ITS WAR

Here's the plot twist: I never really deleted the files as I told CA. TYVM, Google drive.

After the 72 hours EPO expired, another EPO arrives which lasts two years but requires a court appearance. This is a huge problem because I am in the US Army reserves and it requires the handling of firearms which is illegal under an EPO. Her lawyer calls me and threatens me not to "participate in anymore investigations against her" and sends a paper tiger. I get a lawyer, lets name him "Folds like a lawn chair". He tells me "who will they believe: a pretty girl or you?" I fire him. Get a better lawyer, a trial lawyer, called "Miss Badass Esq." and prepare for war. Miss Badass requests a copy of V's EPO from the court. It essentially says I was blackmailing her, threatening to beat her up, and I broke into her room to steal incriminating information against her. All lies. I provide my lawyer the entire history of our relationship: 600 pages of facebook and text messages showing she is the aggressor, the abuser, in the relationship, phone call history, all the recordings and screenshots of her cheating ring. I make a poster sized chart of her room and the events that transpire there the day in question when she tried to trap me into signing a statement taking responsibility for her actions.

Courtdate: We made V and her lawyer look REALLY stupid. They were going with the 'pretty girl' strategy. But the dorm gave us records showing she was signing me in and out of her room, so it discredits the need to break in. The call logs: 130 times in 3 days and aggressive texts showed she wasn't actually afraid of me adn it was her, not me, being aggressive. And when he asked what I had to use to blackmail her, her lawyer said "just some tutoring papers" for which the judge said, "that doesn't sound like anything wrong. What power did that give him over you?" They had no response. My turn to speak, I explain how she tried to get me to rob a guy, how she wanted me to write a letter to take the blame, how she used her position as honor council chair to break state law and violate academic policy. And summarized we were only there because she wanted revenge on me. I watched V and her lawyer stutter and squirm uncomfortably under the judges questioning, case dismissed.

All that information I gathered to defend myself was not going to go to waste. I took it to a newly hired honor council investigator called "Meg" who had no affiliation with V. I told her what CA had done to defend V. A week later, I was told the by Meg there had been a meeting with the school police, the provost, their legal team, then the provost himself decided filed a complaint against V. I had to meet with the police to file a statement about V trying to recruit me to rob someone but other than that I was out of the loop. I later learned the results: V lost her her slot at that school's professional program, her program director yelled at her at the top of his lungs, "YOU WILL NEVER GO TO ********* SCHOOL, I KNOW ADMISSIONS AND I WILL SEE TO IT", she got expelled, her TWO degrees (biomedical engineering and biology with a minor in chemistry) were withheld for 6 years and her transcripts would carry a permanent mention of an honor code violation, her clients who graduated had their degrees retracted with similar mentions on their transcripts, and current clients were also expelled. The school changed its policy on reporting date requirements to like 60 or 90 days. Me? I am in professional school. V had her chance to get away with all of this until she tried to get revenge on me. I reduced this super villain from owning a fleet of beta male minions, being the most connected person in the university, and having a lucrative future in ripping people off in the medical industry to the last time I saw her: riding a fucking scooter.

(source) story by (/u/Apophis1942)