#an article analysis for economics

[vammieposts]

TOMORROW IM SUPER CRAZY HOMEOWRK HUMAN WISH ME LUCKKK

[mj-dovy]

Why do people have to publicly correct me like shut the fuck up

[jcmarchi]

Rodolphe Malaguti, Conga: Poor data hinders AI in public services

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/rodolphe-malaguti-conga-poor-data-hinders-ai-in-public-services/

Rodolphe Malaguti, Conga: Poor data hinders AI in public services

.pp-multiple-authors-boxes-wrapper display:none; img width:100%;

According to Rodolphe Malaguti, Product Strategy and Transformation at Conga, poor data structures and legacy systems are hindering the potential of AI in transforming public services.

Taxpayer-funded services in the UK, from the NHS to local councils, are losing out on potential productivity savings of £45 billion per year due to an overwhelming reliance on outdated technology—a figure equivalent to the total cost of running every primary school in the country for a year.   

A report published this week highlights how nearly half of public services are still not accessible online. This forces British citizens to engage in time-consuming and frustrating processes such as applying for support in person, enduring long wait times on hold, or travelling across towns to council offices. Public sector workers are similarly hindered by inefficiencies, such as sifting through mountains of physical letters, which slows down response times and leaves citizens to bear the brunt of government red tape.

“As this report has shown, there is clearly a gap between what the government and public bodies intend to achieve with their digital projects and what they actually deliver,” explained Malaguti. “The public sector still relies heavily upon legacy systems and has clearly struggled to tackle existing poor data structures and inefficiencies across key departments. No doubt this has had a clear impact on decision-making and hindered vital services for vulnerable citizens.”

The struggles persist even in deeply personal and critical scenarios. For example, the current process for registering a death still demands a physical presence, requiring grieving individuals to manage cumbersome bureaucracy while mourning the loss of a loved one. Other outdated processes unnecessarily burden small businesses—one striking example being the need to publish notices in local newspapers simply to purchase a lorry licence, creating further delays and hindering economic growth.

A lack of coordination between departments amplifies these challenges. In some cases, government bodies are using over 500 paper-based processes, leaving systems fragmented and inefficient. Vulnerable individuals suffer disproportionately under this disjointed framework. For instance, patients with long-term health conditions can be forced into interactions with up to 40 different services, repeating the same information as departments repeatedly fail to share data.

“The challenge is that government leaders have previously focused on technology and online interactions, adding layers to services whilst still relying on old data and legacy systems—this has ultimately led to inefficiencies across departments,” added Malaguti.

“Put simply, they have failed to address existing issues or streamline their day-to-day operations. It is critical that data is more readily available and easily shared between departments, particularly if leaders are hoping to employ new technology like AI to analyse this data and drive better outcomes or make strategic decisions for the public sector as a whole.”

Ageing Infrastructure: High costs and security risks

The report underscores that ageing infrastructure comes at a steep financial and operational cost. More than one-in-four digital systems used across the UK’s central government are outdated, with this figure ballooning to 70 percent in some departments. Maintenance costs for legacy systems are significantly higher, up to three-to-four times more, compared to keeping technology up-to-date.  

Furthermore, a growing number of these outdated systems are now classified as “red-rated” for reliability and cybersecurity risk. Alarmingly, NHS England experienced 123 critical service outages last year alone. These outages often meant missed appointments and forced healthcare workers to resort to paper-based systems, making it harder for patients to access care when they needed it most.

Malaguti stresses that addressing such challenges goes beyond merely upgrading technology.

“The focus should be on improving data structure, quality, and timeliness. All systems, data, and workflows must be properly structured and fully optimised prior to implementation for these technologies to be effective. Public sector leaders should look to establish clear measurable objectives, as they continue to improve service delivery and core mission impacts.”

Transforming public services

In response to these challenges, Technology Secretary Peter Kyle is announcing an ambitious overhaul of public sector technology to usher in a more modern, efficient, and accessible system. Emphasising the use of AI, digital tools, and “common sense,” the goal is to reform how public services are designed and delivered—streamlining operations across local government, the NHS, and other critical departments.

A package of tools known as ‘Humphrey’ – named after the fictional Whitehall official in popular BBC drama ‘Yes, Minister’ – is set to be made available to all civil servants soon, with some available today.

Humphrey includes:

Consult: Analyses the thousands of responses received during government consultations within hours, presenting policymakers and experts with interactive dashboards to directly explore public feedback.

Parlex: A tool that enables policymakers to search and analyze decades of parliamentary debate, helping them refine their thinking and manage bills more effectively through both the Commons and the Lords.

Minute: A secure AI transcription service that creates customisable meeting summaries in the formats needed by public servants. It is currently being used by multiple central departments in meetings with ministers and is undergoing trials with local councils.

Redbox: A generative AI tool tailored to assist civil servants with everyday tasks, such as summarising policies and preparing briefings.

Lex: A tool designed to support officials in researching the law by providing analysis and summaries of relevant legislation for specific, complex issues.

The new tools and changes will help to tackle the inefficiencies highlighted in the report while delivering long-term cost savings. By reducing the burden of administrative tasks, the reforms aim to enable public servants, such as doctors and nurses, to spend more time helping the people they serve. For businesses, this could mean faster approvals for essential licences and permits, boosting economic growth and innovation.

“The government’s upcoming reforms and policy updates, where it is expected to deliver on its ‘AI Opportunities Action Plan,’ [will no doubt aim] to speed up processes,” said Malaguti. “Public sector leaders need to be more strategic with their investments and approach these projects with a level head, rolling out a programme in a phased manner, considering each phase of their operations.”

This sweeping transformation will also benefit from an expanded role for the Government Digital Service (GDS). Planned measures include using the GDS to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities in public sector systems that could be exploited by hackers, enabling services to be made more robust and secure. Such reforms are critical to protect citizens, particularly as the reliance on digital solutions increases.

The broader aim of these reforms is to modernise the UK’s public services to reflect the convenience and efficiencies demanded in a digital-first world. By using technologies like AI, the government hopes to make interactions with public services faster and more intuitive while saving billions for taxpayers in the long run.

As technology reshapes the future of how services are delivered, leaders must ensure they are comprehensively addressing the root causes of inefficiency—primarily old data infrastructure and fragmented workflows. Only then can technological solutions, whether AI or otherwise, achieve their full potential in helping services deliver for the public.

(Photo by Claudio Schwarz)

See also: Biden’s executive order targets energy needs for AI data centres

Want to learn more about AI and big data from industry leaders? Check out AI & Big Data Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London. The comprehensive event is co-located with other leading events including Intelligent Automation Conference, BlockX, Digital Transformation Week, and Cyber Security & Cloud Expo.

Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.

Tags: ai, artificial intelligence, data, europe, government, public services, Society, uk

[myberndpulch]

✌An In-Depth Analysis of Trump, Greenland, the Panama Canal, and the Gulf of Mexico: Geopolitical Ambitions and Strategic Interests

“At strategic crossroads: Trump, Greenland, the Panama Canal, and the Gulf of Mexico—where global power, resources, and security intersect.” Support In-Depth Analysis: Join BerndPulch.org Today Explore the intricate geopolitics of Trump, Greenland, the Panama Canal, and the Gulf of Mexico with BerndPulch.org. Our in-depth analysis unravels the strategic interests and global implications behind…

[fursasaida]

This article is from 2022, but it came up in the context of Palestine:

Here are some striking passages, relevant to all colonial aftermaths but certainly also to the forms we see Zionist reaction taking at the moment:

Over the decade I lived in South Africa, I became fascinated by this white minority [i.e. the whole white population post-apartheid as a minority in the country], particularly its members who considered themselves progressive. They reminded me of my liberal peers in America, who had an apparently self-assured enthusiasm about the coming of a so-called majority-minority nation. As with white South Africans who had celebrated the end of apartheid, their enthusiasm often belied, just beneath the surface, a striking degree of fear, bewilderment, disillusionment, and dread.

[...]

Yet these progressives’ response to the end of apartheid was ambivalent. Contemplating South Africa after apartheid, an Economist correspondent observed that “the lives of many whites exude sadness.” The phenomenon perplexed him. In so many ways, white life remained more or less untouched, or had even improved. Despite apartheid’s horrors—and the regime’s violence against those who worked to dismantle it—the ANC encouraged an attitude of forgiveness. It left statues of Afrikaner heroes standing and helped institute the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which granted amnesty to some perpetrators of apartheid-era political crimes.

But as time wore on, even wealthy white South Africans began to radiate a degree of fear and frustration that did not match any simple economic analysis of their situation. A startling number of formerly anti-apartheid white people began to voice bitter criticisms of post-apartheid society. An Afrikaner poet who did prison time under apartheid for aiding the Black-liberation cause wrote an essay denouncing the new Black-led country as “a sewer of betrayed expectations and thievery, fear and unbridled greed.”

What accounted for this disillusionment? Many white South Africans told me that Black forgiveness felt like a slap on the face. By not acting toward you as you acted toward us, we’re showing you up, white South Africans seemed to hear. You’ll owe us a debt of gratitude forever.

The article goes on to discuss:

"Mau Mau anxiety," or the fear among whites of violent repercussions, and how this shows up in reported vs confirmed crime stats - possibly to the point of false memories of home invasion

A sense of irrelevance and alienation among this white population, leading to another anxiety: "do we still belong here?"

The sublimation of this anxiety into self-identification as a marginalized minority group, featuring such incredible statements as "I wanted to fight for Afrikaners, but I came to think of myself as a ‘liberal internationalist,’ not a white racist...I found such inspiration from the struggles of the Catalonians and the Basques. Even Tibet" and "[Martin Luther] King [Jr.] also fought for a people without much political representation … That’s why I consider him one of my most important forebears and heroes,” from a self-declared liberal environmentalist who also thinks Afrikaaners should take back government control because they are "naturally good" at governance

Some discussion of the dynamics underlying these reactions, particularly the fact that "admitting past sins seem[ed] to become harder even as they receded into history," and US parallels

And finally, in closing:

The Afrikaner journalist Rian Malan, who opposed apartheid, has written that, by most measures, its aftermath went better than almost any white person could have imagined. But, as with most white progressives, his experience of post-1994 South Africa has been complicated. [...]

He just couldn’t forgive Black people for forgiving him. Paradoxically, being left undisturbed served as an ever-present reminder of his guilt, of how wrongly he had treated his maid and other Black people under apartheid. “The Bible was right about a thing or two,” he wrote. “It is infinitely worse to receive than to give, especially if … the gift is mercy.”

[biglisbonnews]

How American And European Banks Are Dealing With The Fallout From The U.S. Banking Turmoil https://seekingalpha.com/article/4603960-how-american-and-european-banks-are-dealing-with-the-fallout-from-the-us-banking-turmoil

[kenyatta]

https://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/californian-ideology

There is an emerging global orthodoxy concerning the relation between society, technology and politics. We have called this orthodoxy `the Californian Ideology' in honour of the state where it originated. By naturalising and giving a technological proof to a libertarian political philosophy, and therefore foreclosing on alternative futures, the Californian Ideologues are able to assert that social and political debates about the future have now become meaningless.  The California Ideology is a mix of cybernetics, free market economics, and counter-culture libertarianism and is promulgated by magazines such as WIRED and MONDO 2000 and preached in the books of Stewart Brand, Kevin Kelly and others. The new faith P has been embraced by computer nerds, slacker students, 30-something capitalists, hip academics, futurist bureaucrats and even the President of the USA himself. As usual, Europeans have not been slow to copy the latest fashion from America. While a recent EU report recommended adopting the Californian free enterprise model to build the 'infobahn', cutting-edge artists and academics have been championing the 'post-human' philosophy developed by the West Coast's Extropian cult. With no obvious opponents, the global dominance of the Californian ideology appears to be complete. On superficial reading, the writings of the Californian ideologists are an amusing cocktail of Bay Area cultural wackiness and in-depth analysis of the latest developments in the hi-tech arts, entertainment and media industries. Their politics appear to be impeccably libertarian - they want information technologies to be used to create a new `Jeffersonian democracy' in cyberspace in its certainties, the Californian ideology offers a fatalistic vision of the natural and inevitable triumph of the hi-tech free market.

from "The Californian Ideology" by Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, 1 September 1995

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Dean Obediallah at The Dean's Report:

No one can deny that Donald Trump has shown a significant level of cognitive decline since he first ran for President in 2015 at the age of 69 years old to where he is today at 78. But what we’ve seen with Trump is far more than normal aging. Trump—as countless mental health experts have stated—is showing symptoms of dementia.  While people can debate if Trump is in the early or mid-stages of severe cognitive decline, what can’t be debated is that this poses a very serious national security issue for our nation. Consequently, this issue demands far more media coverage. On Monday night, I interviewed, psychologist Dr. John Gartner--the founder of “Duty to Warn” –who was first on my show back in April when he was waving red flags about Trump’s mental decline. In April, Gartner noted that Trump “can't get through a rally without committing one of these” tell-tale signs of dementia, such as saying the incorrect word or “combining or mixing up people and generations.”  

He also directed my attention to a petition signed by more than 500 licensed mental health professions—including best-selling authors and well-respected psychologists—warning that Trump was exhibiting signs of dementia. Gartner noted in April that “we're noticing deterioration almost every day” with Trump. Here we are six months later.  After discussing what Dr. Gartner has observed with Trump over the past few months, I asked this simple question: “Does Donald Trump have some form of dementia?” In response, Gartner answered succinctly, “There's absolutely no doubt.” Gartner explained that on his podcast, “Shrinking Trump,” he has welcomed mental health professionals who specialize in dementia—such as from “Duty to Inform”-- and they reached the same conclusion. “We've had neuropsychologists, neuropsychiatrists on the show who have gone through their analysis” and confirmed what they are observing is dementia, Gartner noted. He added, “When you really talk to the experts and the super experts, it's even more apparent,” that Trump’s exhibiting symptoms consistent with this condition.

Dementia is not a term that should be thrown around whimsically to score political points. Dementia—as Dr. Gartner explained—is “brain damage.” He continued that it’s “a deteriorating organic process in the brain where the cognitive processes start to break down.” He added alarmingly that with people like Trump, “they only go in one direction. They keep sliding downhill.” Adding to the credibility of this diagnosis is that dementia runs in the Trump family. As Donald’s own nephew, Fred Trump III, explained on my show recently, Donald’s father, Donald’s older sister, Maryanne and Donald’s cousin, John Walters all had dementia. And as the NY Times reported ten days ago in an article on Trump’s cognitive decline, “Trump has seemed confused, forgetful, incoherent or disconnected from reality lately.”  They added, “He rambles, he repeats himself, he roams from thought to thought — some of them hard to understand, some of them unfinished, some of them factually fantastical.”

Just look at Trump’s conduct in the past week that provides more jarring examples. At an event at the Detroit Economic Club when he was supposed to address economic issues, he literally began to speak of Elon Musk’s missiles landing, “Biden circles” that were “beautiful” but Biden “couldn’t fill them up” to “we’ve been abused by other countries, we’ve been abused by our own politicians”–all in the same incoherent answer.  I played that clip for Dr. Gartner who commented that it makes “you realize how completely lost Trump is.” In addition, Trump while appearing on a podcast last week literally delivered a 12 minute (yes, 12 minute) meandering answer that was so incoherent it caused the hosts to joke that Trump was not rambling, he was “weaving.” One host added that they “don’t even want to know the answer anymore,” they just want more “weaving.” They were humoring Trump who was not making sense.

And at a rally in Pennsylvania on Monday, Trump told the crowd to vote on “January 5”—not November. That of course could simply be a minor mental flub, but what came next was truly bizarre. Trump told the audience that it was time to end the questions and just listen to music. I’m not kidding. The context was that two people had passed out from heat at the event, to which Trump asked, would “anybody else would like to faint?” Trump then declared, “Let’s not do any more questions. Let’s just listen to music. Let’s make it into a music. Who the hell wants to hear questions, right?”  Then—as the Washington Post reported—"For 39 minutes, Trump swayed, bopped — sometimes stopping to speak — as he turned the event into almost a living-room listening session of his favorite songs from his self-curated rally playlist.”

Yes, Trump stood on stage for nearly 40 minutes at a packed Town Hall where instead of answering questions, he danced. I know it sounds like a Saturday Night Live sketch, but it was real life. If President Biden had done that when he was the nominee, we would’ve seen non-stop coverage exploring his mental state. All of this is why this is truly a national security issue. As Dr. Gartner explained, a person with dementia like Trump could be easily manipulated by “corrupt businessman or any hostile foreign power.” He cited the examples of how devious people have taken advantage of those with dementia to get them to sign a will that makes the person the sole beneficiary. But in the case with Trump, we are potentially talking about Trump agreeing to allow wealthy backers like Elon Musk to financially benefit at our expense. Or worse, allow our enemies to take advantage of him—more than they even did in the past.

Dean Obeidallah succinctly explains that Donald Trump’s dementia is not only a political issue but also a national security issue.

[fastenyourseatbelts]

I had hoped sleeping on the Neil Gaiman article would make me feel a little better about the whole situation, but it hasn't. I feel heartbroken, angry, and betrayed. He's a deplorable human being who was fully aware of the harm he was causing so many women and was doing it anyway; kept "apologising" without any effort to change his behaviour; "he'd die rather than change." I cried through that damn article - cried for the women, whom he took blatant advantage of, and for his son, because god, I don't know what kind of life that child must be leading. Fuck you, Neil Gaiman. Your fans, all those who loved you, deserved better. Shame on you.

For anyone who's managed to escape the storm, don't read the horrific Vulture article if it gets too much. Be sure to look at the trigger warnings first. It's a graphic horror, centered around a violent, gaslighting abuser. You don't need to read it - the allegations made on the podcast are incriminating enough. Do not put yourself through it if you don't feel up for it emotionally.

Finally, this has reignited the discussion around the separating the art from the artist. This is the part that has broken me immensely, because GO and Sandman aren't things I can let go of easily, and fandom in these two spaces was seemingly inextricably linked to Neil. So to anyone trying to make sense of it all, I recommend The Leftist Cooks' video about heroes and Neil Gaiman. It was released around a month ago, so it doesn't work with the huge amount of incriminating information we have now. But their pain, their analysis, and their conclusions remain relevant. I've been holding on to one thing they said - "instead of looking for the soul of the artist in their art, try to find the soul of the art itself." They also talk about the concept of moral capital, and how Neil had it- and took advantage of it. We couldn't have seen it coming - it isn't our fault. The fact that we hold him accountable for his nightmarish crimes is enough.

Finally, separating art from the artist is as economic as it is abstract. So I'll just be pirating all that stuff from now on, I guess. It feels like a weak parting shot. But I'm only human, and I cannot disengage from media I loved so dearly. And that's okay, I think. Every single one of us was betrayed. So fuck the author, but love what he created. A text can literally be interpreted many ways after all, as the Vulture article demonstrates too. Take care of yourselves, y'all :')

[nesiacha]

The Massacre of Jaffa: Bonaparte's Lies

This tragic episode of the Jaffa massacre will explore the events surrounding the massacre carried out by Napoleon Bonaparte, the lies he used to justify it, and how these falsehoods were later repeated by others, including Eugène de Beauharnais, to defend the executions. Although Eugène was not involved in the massacre, he consciously repeated his stepfather's lies. In this analysis, we aim to avoid both the golden legend and the black legend.

On March 7, 1799, Jaffa fell to the French army during their campaign in Syria. The city became the site of a particularly brutal massacre of prisoners, some of whom, according to testimonies, were civilians. The main figure responsible for this carnage was Napoleon Bonaparte.

The account of Jaffa’s capture has been shared in various versions, from immediate eyewitness accounts to official narratives published later. This diversity of perspectives raises important questions about how the events were perceived and reported, both by direct witnesses and by French authorities.

The siege of Jaffa was part of Napoleon’s Egyptian campaign. After capturing the city, the French encountered a determined garrison composed of soldiers from the army of Djezzar, the Pasha of Acre. The attack on Jaffa was intense and violent, leading to a massacre that targeted both soldiers and civilians.

Bonaparte justified this massacre with two lies. The first was that the prisoners had committed perjury (a complicated lie), and the second was that there was a lack of provisions (a simpler lie). Years later, Bonaparte even reduced the number of prisoners and continued to lie about the massacre, even on Saint Helena. This caused discomfort and raised further questions about the truth.

Men loyal to Bonaparte, such as Eugène de Beauharnais, also repeated these lies (although Eugène was not directly responsible for the massacre at Jaffa, he openly echoed his stepfather’s fabrications and must have known the truth, as he was present on the ground)to justify this massacre . You will see that these justifications do not hold up in the link I will share. Initially, I planned to write an article on the subject, but I found a French website containing the work of Cyril Drouet, who does an excellent job of debunking both the golden and black legends surrounding Bonaparte. His work includes testimonies and exposes the violations of wartime laws.

The golden legend justifies the massacre by relying on Bonaparte's lies, while the black legend portrays him as a man who enjoys massacring people for pleasure or executes people based on whim. Both of these views are false. I believe Bonaparte when he states that he did not take pleasure in such actions and was haunted by certain decisions (this perspective comes from someone who generally dislikes Bonaparte).

However, the Jaffa episode is revealing. Bonaparte sometimes believed that instilling fear in his enemies was the only way to deal with them, even if it meant ignoring basic rules. What happened? His opponents, who were seasoned soldiers, only intensified their resistance. These were not impressionable civilians. Bonaparte's victories, or defeats, came at such a high cost that they were often humiliating, resulting in what could be described as a Pyrrhic victory. I have the impression that Bonaparte was occasionally unable to think long-term and focused only on short-term gains.

Indeed, it has been observed that, contrary to popular belief, the victory against Delgrès in Guadeloupe was difficult. Richepanse himself acknowledged this, and for good reason: the soldiers facing him were experienced and well-trained in the art of war. Initially, Richepanse thought that the soldiers who fought against the restoration of slavery, having already faced the British, would bend under intimidation. This was an absolute mistake. Furthermore, the expected economic results never materialized. Similarly, in Saint-Domingue, the conflict ended with a victory and the proclamation of Haiti.

What is the connection to Jaffa? In a similar vein, the massacre not only strengthened the resolve of his enemies but also prompted the Ottomans to justify the execution of some French soldiers by sabre after this massacre ordered by Bonaparte. This is one of the many reasons why rules regarding the treatment of prisoners were established during wartime and should never be violated. (Interestingly, Ottoman forces, according to some testimonies, were more merciful than the French troops.) In short, Bonaparte’s attempt to intimidate the Ottomans by carrying out this horrific massacre under false pretenses failed, having the opposite effect.

I had initially planned to create a separate post, but I found an archived history forum, now closed, where a user named Cyril Drouet gathered all the testimonies and dismantled Bonaparte's and his allies' lies. It's an insightful read and provides a more analytical summary of the issue than I could. You can access it here: https://web.archive.org/web/20170629145019/http://passion-histoire.net/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=37621&sid=7f51b3c72ebbbe9534d2d163d70204fe (it’s in French, but can be translated into English).

For more information on Guadeloupe or Haiti, here are some posts I've written, which touch on the subject alongside Jaffa: More information on slave revolts in the Caribbean Louis Delgrès: Freedom Fighter Mini portraits of three revolutionary women A revolutionary and white battalion leader

The most comprehensive piece so far is about Haiti: The shocking acts by the French army

[demonslayerunhinged]

Unhinged analysis

Why is Sanemi so aggro? (Part 2)

This section is mostly from a class/economic standpoint and doesn't really focus on the demon attack on his family. It is also not only based on my little understanding based on the research I did about poverty and class in Edo/Late Meiji Japan but also based on my experiences as someone who grew up poverty-er-adjacent.

This blog here has an article that does a deep dive into Sanemi based on Japanese culture and history. Their work was what inspired me to do a deeper dive into Sanemi's poor backgoround. It's in Japanese but the translations are so worth it, and they have writeups on other characters!

Now lets get to it, this is post is going to be very long and very sappy, be warned.

His Background

We all know that Sanemi grew up poor, but it's poor in a way that's different from the other characters. We can attribute Gyomei's poverty to his religious faith in a way, Tanjiro and Muichiro are more modest than actually poor - at least they own their houses. The Shinazugawas had a shitty landlord whose son made fun of them for being 'the poor people with too many kids', they lived in these rundown, face-to-face, the-neighbors-know-all-your-business row houses.

Sanemi grew up in the slums with a population of citizens who were essentially 'left behind' during the rise of urbanization and industrialization. These citizens not only had to deal with characterizations that portray them as being ignorant, uneducated, boorish, dirty, aggressive, mannerless and ignorant, but also with being preyed upon by greedy landlords, merchants and businessmen. The government weren't of much help either because they would rather put in efforts into removing them as far as possible from the modern cities, away from the eyes of foreigners.

In my experience, slum dwellers rarely if ever rise above their station in life. Their lack of education and exposure prevents them from making a better life for themselves and even if they do move to the city, they are stuck doing menial or manual labor jobs with shitty pay. They spend their entire lives in perpetual poverty no matter how hard they work and how many jobs they take because they're ultimately fighting a system that has not only abandoned them but also creates policies that prevent them from moving higher in life.

Due to these frustrations, a lot of them take up gambling and drinking alcohol to cope with their sorrows. Frustrations with the system and with their situations lead to a lot of them taking up gambling and developing alcoholism to cope. There is also high rate of violence among them, especially domestic violence as heads of households who were usually the ones to go out into the world and deal with the discrimination and struggles while trying to pursue low class jobs would take out their anger on their wives and ultimately children. The children who grow up in this environment, where violence is all they know would eventually go on to become abusers themselves when they start families of their own, that is, if they don't die of illness or are killed before that.

You can read more about it here, here, here, here and here.

We can see that with Sanemi's dad, the piece of shit who took out all his anger and frustrations on his wife and children before ultimately becoming a victim of violence himself.

After his death, we see Sanemi having to take up the responsibility of taking care of the family as was culturally expected of the firstborn and the oldest boy - similar to Tanjiro. When Sanemi's dad died, he had to take up a job to take care of the family. In the scene where he talks with Genya about their dad's death and their promise to take care of their mother and siblings, we can see that Sanemi is pulling a rickshaw.

Rickshaw pullers were among the lowest classes of manual labor, they were referred to sometimes as 'Human horses' and while they were mostly known for transporting people, they were also hired by merchants and regular people to transport goods as well. We're not told of the work his mother did before she turned into a demon, but she might have been a domestic worker or a waitress of some sort. It's not hard to imagine that there were times when the kids had to go hungry.

So what's the point of all this story? Well because children who come from these backgrounds are not only often violent and aggressive in their language, conduct and personality but even if they do manage to make it to adulthood and by some miracle manage to break through the class barrier they often come out of the other side with a MASSIVE inferiority complex.

And our dear boy Sanemi has one, big time.

Now that we've talked about his background, let's talk about how all this contributes to his....

Relationships

In the fandom, the main complaints about Sanemi is his behavior towards Giyuu, Tanjiro, the demon slayer trainees and Genya, so I'm going to focus on just these.

Giyuu

Like I've mentioned before @roseameilatempest already posted a great write-up about Sanemi and his complicated relationship with Giyuu, so I'm just adding to it.

The two main things that create friction in their relationship, aside from Giyuu's inability to communicate are Sanemi's low self-esteem and his aggressive personality. The low self-esteem really showed itself when he questioned Giyuu at the Hashira meeting about his 'I'm not like you guys attitude'.

In this scene he asks

Which is a really interesting question because of all the Hashiras he's the only one who voices this sentiment. Obanai just talks about Giyuu wanting to get ahead, Shinobu just asks him to explain himself, Muichiro doesn't really care, but there's the thing about being the baby of the group so he may not want to butt-in to the 'adult' matters. Gyomei is praying.

Sanemi's the only one who stands up and confronts Giyuu about the matter but given his background as previously discussed it's almost as if he's asking "Are you looking down on me?".

From the little we know of Giyuu's backstory, he didn't grow up in poverty. After his family died, he went to go live with relatives before making the decision to leave and join the corps. He has fair skin and soft looking features in contrast to Sanemi's rough, scarred ones. He has slim, delicate-looking hands with piano-playing fingers compared to Sanemi large, knobby, rough-looking hands with early-onset-arthritis-ass fingers.

Even his conduct has a certain air of class to it. So when Giyuu says stuff like 'I'm not like other girls-I mean Hashira', the inferiority complex part of Sanemi is triggered, and he takes it as an attack on him thinking that Giyuu is looking down on him because of his poor background and his class.

But Sanemi deep down cares, even if he doesn't realize it. Instead of dismissing Giyuu as just being a dick, he tries to get an answer, an explanation, but because of his rough way of speaking and his aggressive personality it comes out confrontational. He doesn't know how to express himself in a non-aggressive way because nobody ever taught him how.

Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤)

Ah yes, Sanemi's BFF. I'm honestly surprised that some people don't understand why Sanemi does not vibe with Tanjiro. Tanjiro embarrassed him in their first meeting, only to escape the consequences for his actions because of the Master's benevolence. He questioned his worth as a Hashira which, as mentioned in the previous post, is the core of Sanemi's identity.

In their second encounter, Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) talked back to him. Now, despite all the wacky and interesting characters, the fancy mods to their uniform with the haoris and stuff, the Demon Slayers Corps are still a military organization. They have a hierarchy, they have rules and punishments for those who break them and within the context of the military and cultural values: You don't talk back to your superiors, you don't disrespect them and you most certainly don't embarrass them no matter how in the right you feel you are. It's not fair, it just is. Some superiors may tolerate it like Tengen, Giyuu, Mitsuri and Shinobu but others, like Sanemi, Gyomei, Obanai and even Muichiro will not.

I mean, even Mitsuri complained about Genya's behavior when she first met him, even though his actions were because of him being shy.

The first time Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) disrespected Sanemi, he was on neutral ground, the Master's mansion. Kagaya is a saint, so he understood Tanjiro's actions, but remember he also chided Tanjiro a bit, even if it was in a soft manner. Now in this second encounter, He's in Sanemi's house, in his domain, and you can't come about here disrespecting your senior in their own house. And If you do, be prepared to face the consequences.

Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) then embarrassed Sanemi again by (rightfully) calling him out on his shitty behavior towards Genya, in public, in front of his other subordinates. He then proceeds to not only block Sanemi's punch but to counter it with an embarrassing kick to the neck, RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE SCRUBS! Like what? In some organizations, you could be penalized and immediately kicked out, but like I said, Kagaya is a saint.

That's why Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) was given the reprimand and Sanemi wasn't. Because he was in the wrong.

The concept may seem foreign to people who grew up in the west, but for those of us from home countries that have rigid power and class structures, we know this pain all too well.

That's why you talk and complain about your superiors BEHIND their backs, like Zenitsu does.

I swear, Zenitsu is probably the realest character in the series, I love him so much 😂.

Then in the last encounter they had, Tanjiro embarrassed Sanemi again, but this time it's worse because he did it RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIS CRUSH!

Your senior's business is not your business, if you see them fighting, it's best just to leave them alone and pray it's the one you hate that gets his ass kicked.

So here's Sanemi trying to communicate with his crush, and he's about to get to the part where they get to put their hands on each other ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°). Then Tanjiro comes up and gets between them, ignoring the restraining order and then asking if they were fighting over ohagi.

He then reveals Sanemi's biggest secret: That he's gay-I-mean-er likes ohagi. Neither Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) nor Giyuu see any problem with this because soft boys but for a tough, scary man like Sanemi this is a problem. He's a man, he shouldn't be taking sweets! (which is like a real thing in Japan, so i learned. You can read about it here, here, here and here), also Sanemi loves ohagi becuase his mom used to make it; men shouldn't be thinking about their mommies! Men should be tough and only eat manly things like raw bull testicles and cement!

Then Tanjiro(bestest boy ❤) drives the knife even further by asking him about his ohagi preferences, while Giyuu (who unknown to Sanemi is glad to have found an opportunity to rizz him up) asks him to confirm but in Sanemi's mind he thinks Giyuu is making fun of him too.

So Tanjiro has, so far, called him a shitty Hashira, a shitty brother, and now a shitty man. All he wanted to do was smash and now he's getting pressed by a 16 year old. So yea, our boy is going to react in the only way he knows how - by giving Tanjiro a swift clock to the jaw.

At this point, you've gotta pity Sanemi, he's the real victim in this relationship. But let's move on.

The Trainees

This is another complaint that also confuses me because the answer is so obvious. Why is Sanemi hard on the trainees?

Because Sanemi's training is Infinite Strikes! Because his training is supposed to be hard! Because they're at war! Because Muzan might be coming soon! Because this is a military training! Because the Hashiras are basically Drill Sergeants! Because Sanemi says fuck you!

But seriously, I don't understand why Sanemi and Obanai are getting hate for their training methods when Tengen's was just as harsh, Mitsuri was basically ending family bloodlines, Muichiro deadass was about to sashimi someone's child.

And Gyomei? Gyomei's training basically qualifies as torture by the Geneva convention laws. You see these guys below? These boys are all dead! Dead, i tell you! You can't convince me otherwise!

Even Inosuke died!

The training is meant to be harsh because it's not just the trainees lives at stake, it's the people of Japan, it's the lives of their friends, families and loved ones. The Hashiras know this and Sanemi whose whole life revolves around being a demon slayer and killer, especially knows this.

He and Obanai don't have the luxury of sending the junior slayers back for their protection like they did in the mansion. Like we saw in the last episode of the season, Muzan came after everyone not just the Hashira. Despite his rough and harsh exterior, Sanemi actually cares about his colleagues and his subordinates and he doesn't want them to die needlessly. If that means he has to be the 'bad' Hashira, then that's fine with him.

Genya

There's no justification for the shit he pulled trying to poke Genya's eyes out. I've made like two posts regarding this before about how his actions were not only stupid but will ultimately be pointless because Genya is amazing!

Aside from wanting to keep Genya safe (whatever that means), I think one of the reasons Sanemi doesn't want to come in contact with Genya is because when he's around Genya he's reminded of the past and trauma that he's trying to repress. I don't think it was a random choice that older Genya is dressed in a way almost similar to baby Genya. So everytime Sanemi sees him, despite Genya's size and the awesome things he's done, all he can see is that little boy that he almost failed to protect, that called him a monster, that rejected him and seeing that reopens that old core wound. That he's a monster.

Sanemi isn't ready to face all that, so with the little understanding of his own emotions and the trappings of toxic masculinity, he pushes Genya away becuase doing so is way, way, way easier than talking to his brother. It's easier than revealing to Genya that Genya's words did hurt him, that he failed to protect their mom and siblings and that maybe Genya is right, he is a monster, that even though he saved Genya it doesn't change the fact that he used his very hands to kill the only person that loved and protected them in this world.

I think a lot of people really underestimate the gravity of what baby Sanemi did. Tanjiro couldn't kill Nezuko and I'm sure he himself would've rather died than raise a hand to his loved ones but Tanjiro was lucky in a sick way because Nezuko was not only the only survivor but encountered Giyuu who who gave him the opportunity to save Nezuko, essentially giving her a second life. Sanemi never had that chance. In order to protect his brother, he had to kill his beloved mother, and you can just imagine the amount of damage that can do to a child's psyche.

I read a comment on Youtube that said this was probably the reason why Sanemi was so feverently against the Master's defence of Nezuko and that when Nezuko rejected his blood, his whole worldview must have shattered because if Nezuko was able to overcome her demonic urges and still maintain her sanity, why couldn't his beloved mother?

But you might ask, how come Genya seems fine? Well, he wasn't at first, he was basically Sanemi 2.0 but he was able to make peace with himself, escape the trappings of toxic masculinity and the violence that they were raised in. Instead of bottling up his emotions, he wants to reach out, to apologize for his behavior, to mend their brotherhood because no matter how Sanemi is now, no matter how many times he tells him to get lost, no matter the harsh words he throws at him, to Genya he'll always be his Aniki.

The same Aniki who's been looking out for him, the same Aniki that sought him out and comforted him after he punched the landlord's shitty son, the same Aniki who gave him a piggyback ride despite them practically being the same height just to make Genya feel happy and loved, the same Aniki who let out that brilliant laugh after they made the promise to protect their family as he pulled the Rickshaw to make some money for the family, the same Aniki who is the sweetest, kindest person in the whole world.

While we see the rough, scarred, aggressive and scary Sanemi, Genya only sees this:

I'm sure a lot of us know what it's like to be angry, to lash out, to push people away and how difficult it is go through life in a world that doesn't care about you or your trauma. We know what it's like to be left behind and forgotten. We wander aimlessly through life hurting with a feeling of emptiness and we don't even know why. Some of us overcome, some of us don't. We just make do with the tools and little resources we have and Sanemi is a painful reminder of that.

In Conclusion, Sanemi is a complex character. He's not all star good, he's a dick, some of his actions are straightup unhinged, but that's what makes him human. He's not perfect, and for us to appreciate this character we have to accept him in all his wild, raging, scarred, petty-ass, little-brother-eye-poking, women's-size-7-feet-having, ohagi-loving glory.

[blackstarlineage]

The Role of Black Women in Garveyism and Pan-Africanism: A Garveyite Perspective on Leadership, Resistance, and Nation-Building

Black women have been the backbone of Garveyism and Pan-Africanism, yet their contributions are often overlooked in mainstream historical narratives. From a Garveyite perspective, Black women were not just supporters but leaders, strategists, and nation-builders who played essential roles in the fight for Black self-determination, economic independence, and global unity.

Marcus Garvey and the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA) recognized the indispensable role of Black women in advancing the movement, challenging the notion that only men were the architects of Pan-Africanism. Women were at the forefront as organizers, educators, business leaders, and freedom fighters, proving that the struggle for Black liberation required the full participation of both men and women.

This analysis will explore:

The leadership of Black women in Garveyism and Pan-Africanism.

The role of Black women in the UNIA and their contributions to economic empowerment.

How Black women shaped political and intellectual aspects of Pan-Africanism.

The challenges and erasure of Black women’s contributions in the movement.

How Garveyism provides a framework for true gender equality in Black liberation.

1. Black Women as Leaders in Garveyism: The Backbone of the Movement

A. Amy Ashwood Garvey: Co-Founder of the UNIA and Women's Rights Advocate

Amy Ashwood Garvey was a Pan-Africanist, feminist, and co-founder of the UNIA alongside Marcus Garvey in 1914.

She played a key role in early UNIA, organizing, fundraising, and developing the movement’s first institutions.

After parting ways with Garvey, she continued her Pan-African work, advocating for women’s empowerment and linking African liberation struggles with Caribbean and global Black movements.

Example: She founded the International African Service Bureau (IASB) in London, which influenced African independence leaders like Kwame Nkrumah and Jomo Kenyatta.

B. Amy Jacques Garvey: Intellectual Powerhouse and UNIA Editor

Amy Jacques Garvey, Garvey’s second wife, was one of the most influential intellectuals in the Pan-African movement.

She served as editor of the Negro World newspaper, where she published articles advocating for Black women’s leadership in nation-building and economic independence.

She was a strong proponent of Black self-reliance, urging women to take active roles in business, politics, and global liberation movements.

Example: Her book, "Garvey and Garveyism," preserved and expanded on Garvey’s philosophy, ensuring that his ideas influenced future Pan-African struggles.

Key Takeaway: Amy Jacques Garvey proved that Black women were not just supporters but also theorists and leaders in shaping Garveyism and Pan-African thought.

2. Black Women in the UNIA: Organizers, Business Leaders, and Educators

The UNIA was unique among Black liberation organizations in the early 20th century because it actively encouraged women to take leadership roles.

A. The Black Cross Nurses: Health and Nation-Building

The Black Cross Nurses (BCN) was established within the UNIA to provide healthcare, community services, and education to Black communities worldwide.

It modelled itself after the Red Cross, but unlike the Red Cross, which primarily served white communities, the BCN focused on Black health and survival.

Black women in the BCN were trained in medicine, midwifery, and public health, making them key figures in strengthening Black communities.

Example: In Jamaica, the U.S., and Africa, the Black Cross Nurses operated clinics and trained women in health education, making them crucial to Black self-sufficiency.

B. Black Women as Business Owners and Economic Leaders

Garveyism emphasized economic independence as the foundation of Black liberation. Black women were active participants in:

UNIA cooperatives and trade networks, where they built Black-owned businesses.

The Negro Factories Corporation, which established businesses to employ Black people.

The Black Star Line, where women were key financial supporters and investors.

Example: Henrietta Vinton Davis, a leading Garveyite, raised funds for the Black Star Line and helped establish economic initiatives.

Key Takeaway: Garveyism empowered Black women to become business leaders, proving that economic liberation required both men and women’s involvement.

3. Black Women in Political and Intellectual Pan-Africanism

A. Queen Mother Moore: Revolutionary Garveyite and Reparations Advocate

Queen Mother Moore was a lifelong Garveyite who became a leading advocate for African reparations, repatriation, and global Black unity.

She founded organizations that called for African nations to offer citizenship to diaspora Africans.

Her activism directly influenced modern reparations movements in the U.S. and the Caribbean.

Example: She inspired the Republic of Ghana’s "Right of Return" policy, allowing African descendants to reclaim their African heritage.

B. Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti: Nigerian Feminist and Pan-African Activist

A Nigerian nationalist and anti-colonial activist, she fought for women’s rights, economic empowerment, and self-governance in Africa.

She was heavily influenced by Garveyism and used its principles to fight British colonial rule in Nigeria.

Example: She led protests against colonial taxation and exploitation, proving that Garveyite Pan-Africanism was a global force for women’s liberation.

Key Takeaway: Pan-Africanism was never just about men—Black women shaped its intellectual and political foundations.

4. The Challenges and Erasure of Black Women in Pan-Africanism

Despite their leadership, Black women have often been erased from historical narratives of Garveyism and Pan-Africanism.

A. Western and Patriarchal Historical Narratives

Many historians focused on Garvey and other male leaders while downplaying the contributions of women.

Some Pan-African male leaders failed to promote women’s political leadership, limiting their visibility in official accounts.

Example: Even today, books and documentaries on Pan-Africanism rarely highlight Amy Jacques Garvey, Queen Mother Moore, or Black Cross Nurses.

Key Takeaway: Garveyite Pan-Africanism must reclaim women’s history and recognize their leadership in liberation movements.

5. How Garveyism Provides a Framework for True Gender Equality in Black Liberation

Garveyism promoted a holistic approach to liberation, in which Black men and women were equal partners in nation-building.

To fulfill Garvey’s vision today, we must:

Promote women’s leadership in Pan-African political and economic institutions.

Prioritize women’s education and economic empowerment as key to Black sovereignty.

Defend Black women from exploitation, erasure, and patriarchal oppression in all liberation movements.

Ensure women’s representation in Pan-African governance, finance, and military structures.

Final Takeaway: Garveyism provides the blueprint for true Black liberation, where both men and women work together as equals to reclaim Africa, control Black economies, and resist white supremacy.

Conclusion: Black Women as the Heart of Pan-Africanism

Black women were not just participants in Garveyism and Pan-Africanism—they were its architects, strategists, and revolutionaries. Their contributions shaped:

The UNIA’s global impact.

Economic self-sufficiency through Black-owned businesses.

The political theory of Pan-African self-determination.

The cultural and intellectual foundation of modern Black liberation movements.

As Marcus Garvey declared, Black women were essential to the rise of a free and independent Black world.

The future of Pan-Africanism must honour their contributions—not just in history books, but in the continued fight for global Black unity and sovereignty.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

The Harris campaign kicks into high gear

July 26, 2024

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

Kamala Harris has the Trump campaign on its back foot. Whatever Trump’s advisers expected from V.P. Harris, they were wrong. Although Trump and his surrogates have tried several lines of attack, each attempt backfires as Trump offends important constituencies he needs to win. In attacking Kamala Harris, Trump is offending Black Americans, successful women, mothers raising blended families, couples trying to conceive, young people, and more. The Harris campaign has responded forcefully, using a pointed sense of humor that is refreshing and attractive to younger voters who see the internet as a battlefield of ideas.

On Thursday, the Harris campaign released a powerful television ad that was a “no-holds-barred” look at the threat to democracy posed by Trump. See The Guardian, ‘We choose freedom’: Kamala Harris campaign launches first ad. The ad is embedded in The Guardian article; I urge you to watch it. If you don’t, here is The Guardian’s description of the ad:

Released on Thursday morning, the ad opens with shots of Harris’s smiling face behind a podium, the word Kamala, the word Harris, and the American flag. The soundtrack is the beginning of Beyoncé’s song Freedom, to which Harris entered and exited her first speech to campaign staffers after gaining lightning speed momentum on the road to becoming the presumptive nominee. The ad is narrated by Harris, whose first words are, “In this election we each face a question. What kind of country do we want to live in?” She continues: “There are some people who think we should be a country of chaos. Of fear. Of hate,” she says, over shots of Trump and JD Vance. “But us, we choose something different.”

On social media, the Harris campaign has been even more aggressive. The Harris campaign took a clip of Trump imitating Kamala Harris, saying, “I’m the prosecutor and he is the convicted felon.” After Trump admits that he is a convicted felon and Harris is a prosecutor, the ad immediately cuts to a picture of Kamala Harris with her voice saying, “I am Kamala Harris and I approve this message.” The Harris campaign is showing early signs of social media savvy—just as Barack Obama’s campaign did in 2008.

The Harris campaign also went after JD Vance, who described Kamala Harris in 2021 as a “childless cat lady” who should not have an equal voice in the future of America because she does not have biological children. (Harris is a stepmother to two children with Doug Emhoff.) Thursday was “In Vitro Fertilization Day.” The Harris campaign released a statement saying, “Happy World IVF Day To Everyone Except JD Vance.” See HuffPo, Harris Campaign Wishes Happy World IVF Day To Everyone Except 1 Person.

The confidence and swagger of that ad was reflected in the Harris campaign’s immediate acceptance of debate with Donald Trump, set for September 10. But as Kamala Harris demonstrated an eagerness to debate, Trump began hedging his bets, saying he “did not like the idea” of a debate on ABC. See CNBC, ‘Let’s go’: Harris agrees to debate Trump, accuses him of ‘backpedaling’ on Sept. 10 date.

The Harris campaign also used social media to troll Trump's morning appearance on Fox News, during which Trump called Kamala Harris “garbage.” The Harris campaign issued a press release entitled Statement on a 78-Year-Old Criminal’s Fox News Appearance. The press release said,

After watching Fox News this morning we only have one question, is Donald Trump ok? Trump is old and quite weird [and] this guy shouldn’t be president ever again.

For their part, Trump and his surrogates were reduced to claiming that Kamala Harris is a “DEI hire,” a “failed border czar,” and a socialist who will destroy the economy of America.

Luckily for Kamala Harris, economic growth and border security both improved in the second quarter. On Thursday, the US Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that the gross domestic product grew at a 2.8% rate in the second quarter, well above the consensus prediction of 1.9% by economists. See USA Today, US GDP report: Latest data shows economy grew 2.8% in Q2 (usatoday.com)

At the border, crossings by immigrants dropped to their lowest level since 2020 (under Donald Trump). See CBS News, Migrant crossings continue to plunge, nearing the level that would lift Biden's border crackdown. Per CBS News,

July is on track to see the fifth consecutive monthly drop in migrant apprehensions along the U.S.-Mexico border and the lowest level in illegal immigration there since the fall of 2020, during the Trump administration, the internal Department of Homeland Security figures show.

My point in noting the responses by the Harris campaign is not to revel in the “zingers” and “smackdowns” that are long overdue. Rather, it is to highlight the nimbleness, swagger, and professionalism of the Harris campaign. The lightning-quick responses would be exemplary for any presidential campaign; they are stunning for a presidential campaign that is four days old.

Although it is still early, it seems clear that the Harris campaign will focus on Trump's criminality, incoherence, age, and hateful agenda. And it is doing so with a satirical edge that transfers easily into internet memes—which is an effective way to create viral messaging that reaches young people. Meanwhile, the Trump campaign has been caught flat-footed, trying to ignore the awkward creepiness of JD Vance and Trump's part-time approach to campaigning.

All of this should give Democrats confidence that Kamala Harris will run a strong campaign against an opponent who will wage a vile and hate-filled counter-offensive. If the first few days of the campaign are any indication, Kamala Harris is up to the task.

Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter

[olderthannetfic]

No.

As always, you should be more cautious when making mainstream art (if you get to be a Hollywood director, for example) than when making niche stuff.

As for which fiction inspires people to do what, the evidence is pretty murky. I'm sure FINR's Dreamwidth will have some links somewhere that someone who is not me can find. Let's not waste our time on freaking out about Japan. There are some well-publicized problems, but it's also a favorite subject of melodramatic reporting in English.

--

Also...

When someone does cite sources, that doesn't automatically mean the sources say what they claim or that the sources are any good. I waded through the twitter thread you sent, and the first source cited is:

Sluzhevsky, Megan, "The Costs of Lolicon: Japan’s Pedophilia Trade" (2022). Senior Theses. 96.

This is an undergrad thesis, so basically worthless. Sorry, not sorry. (I wrote an undergrad thesis myself. It was also worthless.)

The abstract is:

This thesis investigates Japan’s normalization of pedophilia via the proliferation of popular culture and media. This analysis will begin by looking at historical examples of pedophilia, specifically focusing on chigo in Medieval Japanese Buddhism, wakashu in Edo Period pleasure quarters, and the spread of soft power diplomacy after World War II. This phenomenon will also be viewed in the modern context by discussing lolicon in Japanese media and advertising, idol culture in the Japanese music industry, the JK business, and “real” child pornography. The ways that Japan benefits from this culture economically and politically will also be investigated. Finally, this thesis will take into consideration the opinions of those who do not see these media forms as morally reprehensible, and consider the ways this phenomenon may or may not endanger children in real life.

Chigo?! Wakashu? Fucking really?!

It might be a good paper. You can read it if you really want to. But the abstract is not inspiring a lot of confidence. Wakashu, for example, were often young, but it's a social category that has no modern equivalent, and it's not strictly bound by age. To roll this role for young men into hand-wringing about modern lolicon, not even shotacon? What?

The second citation is by a law student. It's a 2011/2012 article. It doesn't seem like it was peer reviewed, but I'm not sure.

[psychooomind]

Flickering Lights

Michael Gavey x singer!reader

Summary: Michael and Violet come from completely different worlds, but when their paths cross at university, an unexpected connection sparks between them. As their relationship deepens, they must navigate secrets, misunderstandings, and their own fears. Can their love overcome the odds, or will the time put them apart?

A multi-entry, slow-burn, friends to lovers fic.

You can also read it at AO3 here.

Chapter 2

Chapter 1: First Days

The autumn breeze brushed the girl’s cheeks as she adjusted the strap of her violin on her shoulder. She was walking briskly to her first class, listening to Avril Lavigne on her MP3 player.

She was in an incredible mood, having anticipated this moment for months. Yet, she couldn’t shake the first-day nerves, so she decided to walk from her flat to the university. The imposing Gothic building loomed before her, making everything feel more real than she had imagined: she had done it—she was going to study music.

“ You’ll fail, just like your mother did .” Her father’s words had echoed in her head since she was fifteen, ever since she began expressing her growing desire to study music. Her first spark of rebellion had come when she met Hannah Abraham, a Jewish girl who studied French with her and whose parents had allowed her to take drum lessons. Hannah had mentioned that she planned to audition for a girl group in London that was looking for a drummer. The girl had spent countless hours listening to her friend play the drums after their French classes, so she wasn’t surprised when Hannah got the spot. What Violet didn’t know then was that she would become a fan of the band and, a year later, would join them as a secondary vocalist, becoming part of the incredible Wrecked Shiny Girls.

Now, three years later, she was here, refining her craft. Her father still disapproved of her choices, particularly her involvement with the band, but there was no turning back now. Besides, Frederick Bryon still had Victor, her twin brother, who was also starting university—but at Christian Church College. Victor followed their father’s orders to the letter and was studying economics as instructed.

But Violet had a clear purpose: to prove that studying music at St. Hilda’s was more than just a “rebellious phase,” as her father insisted on calling it. To her, this wasn’t simply a decision; it was her life and her passion.

When she entered her first class, Musical and Artistic Analysis, she sat at the front and waited for the other students to file in. Among the crowd, she recognised Marcey Frey and Caroline Meyer, two girls from her old school. Both ignored her, which came as no surprise—she had never had a good relationship with them.

The professor, Cornelia Shawn, was a renowned British composer who had been teaching at St. Hilda’s since the 1980s. Violet had read several articles about her and her involvement in songs by the likes of Billy Joel, Elton John, and others. When Professor Shawn introduced herself, the room erupted into applause, Violet’s hands among them. She still couldn’t quite believe where she was sitting.

At the other end of Oxford, a boy was getting dressed for his first day. Michael had chosen one of the shirts his mother had neatly ironed and folded into his bag, pairing it with cargo trousers his uncle Alfred had gifted him last Christmas. There wasn’t a mirror in his dorm room.

In fact, there wasn’t much in his dorm room at all. Just a bed with built-in drawers, already made with sheets from home the night before; a desk displaying his weekly pill organiser as its only noteworthy item; and a slightly rusted lamp he hadn’t yet tested to see if it worked. The walls were white but scarred with small patches of peeled paint, evidence of a poster once taped there before his arrival. A corkboard hung on the wall as well, predictably bare.

He had made a mental note when he arrived to unpack his clothes and place them in the drawers, but he’d barely slept the night before. His anxiety was through the roof, so he dashed out to his first class: Calculus. He was the first to arrive, even before the professor, who shuffled in at a slow, weary pace. The man unlocked the room, and Michael took a seat at the front. The professor eyed him curiously before settling in to wait for more students.

A group of students trickled in moments later, filling the room with murmurs and footsteps. The constant noise set Michael on edge until the professor finally rose and addressed the class, introducing himself and outlining the syllabus as though anyone actually needed to hear it.

Michael took notes on everything. He didn’t need to—his memory was impeccable, and he retained every word the professor said with ease. But years ago, his therapist had recommended putting his thoughts on paper when he felt anxious. Today, his thoughts were entirely consumed by calculus. As he looked down at his notebook, he felt a rare sense of satisfaction. Numbers, at least, were beautifully, perfectly controllable.

After class, he headed back to his dormitory but decided to detour through the cafeteria. Inside, a group of students his age were shouting and sitting on tables instead of chairs, talking as though they were the only ones in the room. He recognised them from the night before—the same group of misfits whose “first-night party” had kept him awake. Naturally, he hadn’t been invited.

Among them was a tall boy with a piercing in his eyebrow, laughing obnoxiously with a red-haired guy about a group of students who had tried to join the party without an invitation. Next to them, a dark-skinned boy with an afro was mockingly teasing a girl whose skirt was so short Michael could have sworn he’d seen her underwear. Meanwhile, her friend was fiddling nervously with her hair, casting provocative glances at the boy with the piercing.

Michael knew who they were. They weren’t there to study but to make a mess of things. They were the type who hadn’t earned their place but had wealthy parents footing the bill for expensive and, in Michael’s view, pointless degrees like Art or Business Management.

He, on the other hand, had spent nearly five years preparing to earn his scholarship to Oxford. Not only that, but he had the distinction of being, quite literally, the best young mathematician of his age. He’d won district, regional, and national competitions to get here. His mother had dragged him to every one of those competitions to ensure he reached his goal. And now here he was, watching others squander their privilege, lounging about with famous surnames and deep pockets.

He approached the vending machine, slid in his money, and waited for his chocolate bar. But the old, neglected machine jammed. Behind him, the red-haired boy joined the queue.

“Taking long, mate?” asked the boy, eyeing him curiously.

“It’s stuck,” Michael muttered without looking up, giving the machine a firm knock.

“What was that?” the boy snapped, his tone sharp. “What did you say?”

“The machine’s stuck,” Michael repeated irritably.

Michael sighed, delivered another frustrated knock to the vending machine, and prepared to leave. Behind him, the red-haired boy called out to one of his friends—the one with the piercing—who approached, smirking. Michael didn’t wait for the encounter to escalate. He recognised their type all too well: the kind who could spot an easy target from a mile away.

“All good, Victor?” asked the boy with the piercing.

“Yeah, the nerd broke the vending machine. No drink for me, I guess,” the redhead replied with a laugh.

Michael stormed back to his dormitory, fuming. Spoiled brats. He’d lost both his snack and his time.

As he approached his room, a nearby door slammed shut. He paused, watching curiously. After a moment, a girl’s head poked out cautiously before retreating with a startled “Oh, God.”

He stared at the door, puzzled.

“Sorry,” came a muffled voice from the other side. “I have a hard time socialising with people I don’t know.”

Michael nodded to himself and entered his own room. At least he wasn’t the only odd one on the floor.

At St. Hilda’s, Violet had just finished her first class and was heading to the bustling campus café. The atmosphere was overwhelming, like trying to tune into thousands of conversations all at once. Groups of students animatedly debated the recent tuition fee hike to £3,000 per year at universities across the country. Others read passages from Zygmunt Bauman aloud, while a smaller cluster sat to one side, strumming guitars.

She found a quiet table and sat alone, pulling out her songbook. That weekend, she had band practice, and there were still songs she hadn’t memorised. As she focused on the lines of a new melody, someone approached.

“Mind if I sit here?” asked a girl with curly hair and curious eyes.

“Of course, go ahead,” Violet replied with a smile.

The girl introduced herself as Claire, a literature student who also had a keen interest in music. Their conversation flowed effortlessly, and for the first time since her arrival, Violet felt she might find genuine friendships here.

Later, when Violet returned to the apartment she shared with her brother, she opened the door to find the living room thick with smoke and laughter. Victor and his friends had brought bottles of liquor and a deck of cards.

“Victor, what’s going on?” Violet asked, setting her violin case on the floor.

“Relax, hippie. We’re prepping for our first-night dinner,” Victor replied, raising his glass. Beside him sat a tuxedo and shirt, crumpled and ignored.

“Could you at least not turn my living room into a dodgy pub? You know you can’t smoke in here.”

“Your living room,” Farleigh Start mocked, his voice dripping with sarcasm. Beside him, Felix Catton let out a loud laugh. “Looks like the princess here thinks she owns the castle.”

“It is my apartment, Start. If you don’t like the rules, you can leave.”

“It’s Daddy’s apartment, not yours,” Start sneered.

Violet rolled her eyes. “Well, at least I have one, don’t I?”

Farleigh muttered a curse under his breath, and Victor, her brother, did nothing to defend her. Violet chose to ignore them, slamming her bedroom door shut. A chorus of male howls and laughter erupted behind her.

Victor’s friends had always been insufferable, and university hadn’t changed a thing. Felix Catton, Farleigh Start, and a few of the girls, like India Aitken and Anabell Bodley, had all attended the same school as Violet and Victor. She had endured Felix’s relentless advances and Anabell’s passive-aggressive hostility for years. In gym class, Anabell had often ensured they were paired together, deliberately targeting Violet with the ball during games.

That evening, as Violet practised quietly on her bass guitar, she made herself a promise: she wouldn’t let Victor and his friends’ antics derail her ambitions

As Michael wandered through the dining hall, he was still debating whether or not to attend the dinner. Upon arrival, he realised there wasn’t a single available seat. Every table was packed with groups that had already formed, many of them students who seemed to know each other.

Most people didn’t even glance at him, and those who did wore faint expressions of discomfort or indifference. Finally, Michael spotted an empty chair at a table tucked away in the corner. After a moment’s hesitation, he approached and sat down. The others at the table didn’t seem particularly invested in the social dynamics of the room, which, in that moment, was a relief.

A few minutes passed before a boy with brown hair and glasses similar to Michael’s sat down across from him. Michael observed him as he nervously scanned the room, clearly aware of his outsider status. To Michael, he was unmistakably one of them —another invisible presence—and that, oddly enough, made him feel a little less alone.

Without giving it much thought, Michael thrust out his hand abruptly, almost with authority, to break the silence.

“I’m Michael Gavey,” he said, his voice carrying its usual tone of self-assuredness.

The boy, slightly startled but polite, shook his hand.

“Oliver,” he replied.

“Oliver what ?” Michael pressed.

“Oliver Quick.”

“Ah, one of those, are you? A nobody, right?” Michael said with a wry smile, half-expecting a snarky retort.

Oliver shrugged, letting out a nervous laugh.

“Aren’t we all? It’s just the first night,” he replied, glancing uneasily around the room.

Michael’s gaze followed his, pointing out the packed tables where students were laughing and bonding with ease. The contrast with his own corner of the room couldn’t have been starker—a gathering of strangers and misfits.

“Look around,” Michael said, bitterness creeping into his voice. “You see what I see. It’s you, me, and the girl with agoraphobia who hasn’t even left her room.”

Oliver shifted uncomfortably, unsure how to respond. He couldn’t deny the truth in Michael’s observation. Their table was, indeed, a haven for those who didn’t quite belong. Oddly, though, Oliver found the isolation less troubling than he might have expected.

“What are you reading?” Michael asked abruptly, steering the conversation away from the heavy silence but still unable to shake his own simmering frustration.

Oliver hesitated, holding up the book in his hands.

“Nothing in particular,” he said evasively.

Michael wasted no time.

“I’m reading maths,” he announced, a smug grin spreading across his face. “Not because I enjoy it—though I’m brilliant at it. I can solve anything. Go on, test me. Ask me a sum.”

Oliver blinked, taken aback by the boldness of the claim. He hesitated, unsure whether to humour him.

“No, that’s fine…” Oliver said quickly, trying to sidestep the challenge.

Michael wasn’t having it. His need to prove himself burned too brightly.

“Come on, ask me. Anything.”

Oliver glanced at him, his expression growing tense.

“No, really, it’s fine—”

“Ask me a fucking sum!” Michael snapped, his patience wearing thin.

“All right then…” Oliver relented, pausing for a moment. “Four hundred and twenty-three times seventy-eight.”

Without missing a beat, Michael responded.

“Thirty-two thousand, nine hundred and ninety-four.”

Oliver stared, visibly impressed. It wasn’t just that Michael had given the correct answer; it was the speed and apparent ease with which he’d arrived at it. Michael leaned back in his chair, a self-satisfied grin on his face, savouring the moment.

Unbeknownst to him, at a nearby table, Victor and Felix were watching. They nudged each other and laughed quietly, mocking him from a distance. Between the two of them, they planned an idea to play a joke on him.

That Friday, Violet had already finished all her classes for the week. She caught a bus to meet her band at Barry’s Pub, a cosy venue with exposed brick walls, an open bar, and most importantly, a raised stage. For The Wrecked Shiny Girls , this place would soon become their sanctuary.

Dany, the owner, had agreed to keep them as the weekend night act, a deal that promised to boost both the pub’s reputation and the band’s popularity among Oxford’s student scene.

“This is going to be amazing,” said Walda, the band’s vocalist, as she adjusted her microphone. “Our big break, ladies. Mark my words.”

Violet tuned her bass and got ready for the opening song. As the first chords filled the air, Jessy stood nearby, chewing gum and untangling her microphone cables.

“It’s too dark,” she remarked flatly. “The stage is practically invisible.”

Violet glanced around and realised Jessy was right. The stage lacked any direct lighting, and with the pub packed, they were in danger of being completely overlooked.

Walda, sporting her punk boots and spiked hair, started grumbling that this was the only place that had given them a chance. Jessy, clearly in a mood, fanned the flames of the argument. Lorelei had to step in to calm them down, while Violet and Hannah exchanged weary looks.

Walda’s temper could be explosive, and Jessy often seemed to be there just to provoke her. While Violet felt like she was exactly where she belonged, she worried that external pressures or the lack of camaraderie between the two might sabotage the band’s potential.

She couldn’t afford to lose this.

On stage, none of it mattered—the tension at home, her father’s disapproval, or anyone else’s opinions. It was just her and the music.

[cicaklah]

get ready for my thoughts on yaoi UBI

So I’ve kvetched about UBI in the tags for long enough someone finally asked me what I was going on about so here we go! 

I will start with some caveats: 

I am British, and so I can only speak about the British specifics.

I have for the past twelve years worked as a professional health economist, and health economics is based on social welfare theory (specifically growing out of Arrow’s work in the 1960s and Sen’s work in the 80s/90s). I literally could talk forever about this, but I won’t. If you want to know more, read the pretty good wikipedia article on welfare economics.

But fundamental to welfare economics is two things: if we make a great big change, do the benefits outweigh the costs? And does the change make a fundamental change for good? (aka cost-benefit analysis and pareto efficiency).

The other thing you need to know about me is that I don’t like activists very much, because they never have to show their working, and my entire professional life is showing my working, and critiquing other people’s working. We all have ideas mate, show me the plan! I love a plan! and this isn't coming from anything but personal experience; I have been to talks by UBI activists before, including ones by economists, but I have never had the case made to me that UBI would be either cost-beneficial OR approach pareto efficient. In fact, it usually reminds me of arguments that are based on some other imaginary world, and then I get so annoyed I want to scream. 

In the early 2010s when I was first starting working as an economist, I was asked to build a model to see whether switching a disability benefit from government administered to individual administration would be cost-effective. Essentially, if you were newly in a wheelchair and you needed a ramp building up to your house, would it be better for the government to organise a contractor, or for you to be given a cash transfer and organise it yourself? The answer was that it wasn’t, but anyone who has ever had to hire a builder could have told you that, and the government didn’t have to pay my firm £30,000 to make that decision. But that is what UBI essentially is; a cash transfer where you get cash and the government gets to enjoy less responsibility.

There are 37.5 million people of working age in England. (Nearly) every single working person gets what's called a tax free allowance, where the government doesn’t claim income tax on the first £12,570. (Once you make over £120k, your allowance starts to decrease, and you lose it entirely at I think £150k)

Let’s assume that instead of just not claiming tax on this amount, the government switched to making that £12,570 your UBI. That is £471,375,000,000 just for England - just under half a trillion pounds. In cash, or nearest as in our modern economy. And not one off - Every year. 

Okay, let's say that the country does have a spare half a trillion a year (in cash) lying around. What is the benefit to switching from tax free allowance to UBI? Well, let's assume that no one stops working, so there would be the tax receipts from the 20% income tax on the £12,570, and that’s just a shade under £100 million. Not bad.

But if you’ve seen a UBI post, you will know that people like the idea because they will be able to work less. Which probably means that UBI will need to be paid for in some other way. Perhaps by cutting existing benefits. The universal credit cost is around £100 billion. So we’re still £300 billion short, and honestly, you wouldn’t cut all of universal credit anyway, probably only the unemployment benefits, but I’m not digging into the maths on that tonight. 

But, look, I am sympathetic. I am a welfarist. I genuinely believe that the economy is not just money, that welfare is happiness, it is utility, it is all the stuff that makes life worth living, and it is the responsibility of the government to maximise the welfare/happiness/utility/quality of life of the country through efficient use of taxation and other sources of money. So people give the government money and it spends it on goods and services and then people get utility, and then they spend their own money to get more utility, and ultimately we can gain intangible things that are incredibly valuable. 

But the problem is that cash is cash, cold and hard and very real. I don’t know how unlimited spare time translates into half a trillion real pound coins. I wouldn’t know how to build a model that complex and uncertain, especially as this all assumes that you can live on 12k a year, and that whatever replaces progressive taxation is equally progressive. I haven’t even touched on how having a convoluted welfare state insures it somewhat against being entirely destroyed after a change in political opinions, aka what I call the daily mail test. You think the narrative about people on welfare is bad now? But also, how would you deal with people who didn’t manage their UBI money well? What happens if there is a personal crisis?

The more I look at it, the more the existing system is actually remarkably good value for money. Individualism is expensive. Collective decision making and spending is just cheaper. 

Ultimately I don’t see the additional benefit of UBI, requiring a pie in the sky change, when it is far, far, far more cost effective to strengthen the existing regime across the board; taxation law, social safety net, childcare, working laws, education and health - all systems that are already in place, and have a thousand times higher likelihood to be pareto optimal and cost effective than trying to find half a trillion pounds of cash round the back of the sofa, while torching 150 years of progress so middle class people can write their book without having to have a job. If I was conspiracy minded I would say that UBI feels like a psy-op, trying to shut down old fashioned progress in favour of ripping it all out and starting again.

Ultimately, that is my real annoyance. It is far, far, far cheaper for the government to provide you with your new ramp for your house, and that is done through politics, but not fun moonshot politics, the hard shit that isn’t sexy.