#and I don't even believe in elections

[kardilier]

I hope every man that voted for Trump gets castrated

[megpricephotography]

Beach Boy! Barney, jumping for joy during a trip to the beach in July of 2012.

[langernameohnebedeutung]

.

[brick-van-dyke]

As the US election closes in and the final states take to the polls, I want to remind people to turn out and protest.

Yep, protest. Strike, disrupt, be out there on the street regardless of who you voted for or who wins. I expect to see you all out there demanding; access to abortion nation wide, protections against discrimination, free universal healthcare, a free Palestine, anti war, prison abolition, to increase the minimum wage, and for a US free of the electoral college and that counts votes as votes.

Yes, you can say "you should vote for Harris" and do so as much as you like, but do not forget the power you have through your own everyday actions away from the polls and that of protesting. Do not use the excuse that your right to vote means it's somehow more foundational or important than the right to protest. You have the ability to create direct action and that is so so important, please don't just expect a rich representative to stick to their promises every time you vote; you have power too, never forget that.

This system will not change until we, the people, make it. There is NO representative that can ever change the system that allowed them in, and likewise; this system will never allow a candidate that would stop it from continuing and/or ensuring its designated purpose of oppression and subjugation. Resist, regardless of the results.

Long live the resistance.

[aquarianlights]

How do you keep going when it looks like 99% of your country has joined a cult whose soul purpose is hatred of everything you & everyone you know & love are when all you're doing is existing just like everyone else?

[britneyshakespeare]

Had the extremely upsetting experience of a mutual of like 6 years going off on me for occasionally making posts about supporting Harris because apparently that makes me a g n cide denier who refuses to learn and grow, with all of my views just being assumed not even from what I've told them I believe or what I've posted before, but just because I DON'T post particularly the kind of things they THINK I should be. When I pointed out how much they were just completely assuming about stuff I'd never talked to them about, I was told it doesn't matter what I do in real life or "care" about if I simply disagree with their conclusion and vote for her anyway. Like they were absolutely not sorry for the level of maliciousness they not just assumed of my character, but for some reason thought appropriate to bring directly to me before unfollowing me. No apology whatsoever for how discomforting or upsetting that might be and certainly no acknowledgment that I could disagree with them and still be a good person. I just got another even longer rant about how they fundamentally can't fuck with me because of this one thing, no matter WHAT else I do in my real life (which I pointed out that they do not know), and how I'm directly supporting fascism.

Like seriously what is it about Tumblr that makes people think they know someone based off of occasional posts? There were just such DEEP assumptions they were making of me and going off of very little or absolutely nothing. Around the time I first became mutuals with that person I used to express my personality and beliefs and talk about what was going on in my life a lot more openly, but I've significantly scaled back on doing that in many ways for many reasons. One of my major ones is privacy and the way I've had strangers outside my followers and following circles just find random things I say and dogpile me for it. I was fundamentally changed after some T Fs did that to me like 3 years ago. I also just didn't have many conversations w that person anymore (I message people in general on here like 10x less than I did circa 2018-2019, which I'm somewhat sorry about!). My point is to say I think this person felt comfortable assuming that they knew me, especially who I am in 2024 at the age of 25, much better than they actually did.

One of the specific things they accused me of was being afraid of learning and growing (because I don't perform social media activism on here like they think I should). Like AFRAID to take criticism. When again I've never received criticism from them or had to respond to any criticism on here before as pertaining to my views on... well, absolutely any of the issues they accused me of not caring about. They essentially treated it as if the only thing in the world I cared about was the US election and characterized me as the most out-of-touch liberal they could possibly imagine, because I'm not "pushing" Kamala Harris to be better (Oh?? Should I do that on here?? Does she read my blog??).

And most hypocritically what they said was that I only *sometimes* *vaguely* post pro-Harris things (I often post like 5 or fewer things in a day though?). But here's the kicker. "Because I know I'll get shit for it. And rightfully so."

Really????? Not a single person, anon or not, in my messages or in a tagged post or anything, has ever given me shit before for saying who I'm voting for. I'm actually NOT afraid of "getting shit" for that opinion, I just don't start fights with people who are anti-voting. And why should I??? I genuinely don't believe in trying to change the minds of strangers on the internet about that sort of thing. I'm just not confrontational about it; that is so not the same thing as being "afraid of getting shit." I'm not posting ENOUGH about my support for Harris, therefore I'm afraid. But therefore they can also make all these assumptions about me being their strawman for an ignorant Harris supporter.

I'm afraid of getting shit but I still post anyway? But if I weren't afraid of getting shit I'd be posting a lot more?? This is ALL based on their assumptions of what my blog *should* look like, based on what I really and truly believe. My level of posting every now and then is an accurate gauge of my feelings on complex, sensitive, global issues. Because I'm voting for the Democratic presidential candidate and I'm ok sharing pretty much just that little glimpse of myself.

I really don't think that person knows just how inappropriate and insulting that is to just say all of that to me. Like they really know what's going on in my head. Their first message began and ended with like "I'm sorry I love you I just can't take it anymore" but they clearly weren't sorry enough to try and be more respectful to me, and they didn't love me enough not to default to extremely ungenerous assumptions and attacking me based off of those instead of any actual words I've said that they take issue with.

Online radicalization is real and it's not necessarily bad because your political views can start to fall well out of the contemporary Overton window. The way you find it appropriate to treat people whose views, however common, seem to fundamentally misalign with yours... that does matter. You can't just assume the worst of everyone and then act on that in how you approach them as individuals. And then be shocked that you don't stay friends with them. You can't be confrontational with someone about an issue you've never had an honest conversation about, and then expect them to take your bad faith in them as reasonable well-meaning criticism.

I'm afraid of criticism??? I'm afraid of criticism. No I'm not. This person and I have never had an issue before where they criticized me and I got harshly defensive. It was ALL projection. The entire tone of their messages was as if all their anti-voting posts recently were somehow in communication with the occasional go-vote-for-Harris posts that I make. That's not a conversation. I don't post for your satisfaction. I don't post in "response" to my mutuals I disagree with. I just post what's on my mind, sometimes, about some things. I really again can't stress enough how baffled I am by this

[drbtinglecannon]

Just saw a post saying the election is just melodrama and they don't care who you support politically as long as you "don't be annoying about it"

Omg, duh, teehee! Of course! As long as the nazis aren't annoying about being nazis it's completely fineee! 😚 So silly of people to not want to be around fascists, it's just their quirky ideology -- that little thing that influences all their morals and beliefs!!! 🤭 -- that everyone outside their idea of acceptable human being need to be eradicated to uphold white supremacy is sooooooooo annoying! 🤪 Voting for gas prices over human life is a'ok if you prommy to be chill about it ✌️✌️

[marietheran-archived]

...I so can't wait till the US elections are over.

[kushamisaru]

Been seeing way less people talk about shit republicans are doing in their quest to demonize democrats (shut up for five minutes, this post ain't about them and I already know why you're mad at them, I am too). And I don't think people are taking the fact that republicans will have majority in EVERY branch of government seriously come January 2025. Anything that gets passed has to go through them, whether democrats help or not. So maybe try remembering you have two feet to step on two necks. Just some food for thought.

[iwanttorundirectlyintothesun]

fuck the ndia

no, seriously, these bastards are so incapable of admitting that they don't actually care about the Australian people that they want to blame people who don't follow their (self-admittedly) complicated instructions to the dot on the i's for "wasting money" by accruing aids that they actually need. they punish people by refusing to help people buy clothing accommodations, mobility aids, transport and then making them wait for replies. a kid died. a 19 year old on an ndis plan died in their home because the ndia didn't help, didn't give them the support that they needed to the point that the last thing the kid communicated to anyone was a text asking if the ndis responded to their request for 24 hr support.

Menstruation products are only available as a support if they are deliberately and specifically required by the disability, not if your period is affected by your disability, not if you have a particularly difficult menstrual cycle that is exacerbated by your disability, only if you have an issue that is specifically and evidentially caused by your disability.

They want thousands of dollars worth of reports that list each thing wrong with you and the way you live, they want several years worth of doctors visits and personal accounts and bank statements. All so someone that doesn't even have a medical degree can tell you that it's not cost effective. Can tell you that under rule 34 of the 2013 ndis act they can legally say, "sorry, you're not worth the money".

And then when you give them that truly unnecessary number of personal details and evidence they don't even look at it. They don't read the letters from the specialists. They ignore evidence and say that it doesn't matter that that recommendation came directly from a professional/specialist. They don't look at the receipts and testimonials and papers you've found and researched on your own time to prove that this aid will help, this prescription will help you live a better, calmer, happier life not marred by as much pain and suffering. A life that's living and not just surviving.

All because they don't care, because the government made some stupid decisions decades ago and every time they get an opportunity to change they dig themselves deeper and say don't worry about the inflation, don't worry about the cost of living, don't worry about how your body and your country are failing you.

People on a disability scheme like the ndis according Australian Institute of Health and Welfare are twice as likely if not more to commit suicide than the general population. Men who are disabled are more likely to commit suicide and more likely to consider it (doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdy197).

They hire lawyers that call in soft voices to tell you that you need to resubmit years worth of evidence, that "that's not what the agency is for" when you ask for the recommended number of hours. And legal aid is no help, they want you to wait until you're booked until you ask them for help even when you've been told specifically to ask them for help. And because this is happening all over, the support workers and advocacy groups are overrun and overworked.

The ndia only cares if it will make them look good on paper. The ndia will tell the general population "look how much money we saved" while the disabled looks on in agony, while they are denied medication, support, aid, transportation, therapies and god knows what else.

[badley]

i recommend. Personally. watching international court cases and being in a removed part of your brain fucking terrified and horrified while you try and remain focused on the facts in the front of your mind so that you can know what the fuck is going on. and then letting that stew to make a list of things you find suspicious or dubious. also recommend then watching a bunch of philosophy all night and going hm fair point and well no i don't think that's true. and then doing the writing three pages thing your good friend suggested to you. and knowing your own naivete intimately. and then i recommend grabbing the a3 newsprint block so that you may make some inconsequential art. which inevitably will help you think. and then i recommend writing again to find out what you think. happy monday guys

[im-getting-help]

guys... are you ok?

[weakinthekneez]

it's looking like the chances of trump getting elected are high and i'm actually freaking out about it

like i genuinely don't know what i'll do if project 2025 gets passed- pretty much all of i've been holding on to these past years is being able to medically transition when i'm old enough

if it gets passed i won't be able to. and it's not as simple as just moving either, id just be starting college and don't have the financial means for this

idc how dramatic this sounds but if trump gets elected myself along with many others will suffer immensely. it feels like such a leap but i don't know how i'm going to be able to be alive without transition ing.

PLEASE don't vote third party or not at all bc doing that is a vote for him- you don't have to like Biden but you have to see the damage that Trump will do to the country and hundreds of thousands of people that live in the u.s.

[plethoraworldatlas]

Some people have already jumped to "Hillary Clinton lost because people talked about racist things she do so anyone who talks about Biden doing racist things is a faker virtue signaller psyop Idiot Trump loving fascist".

I cannot stress enough that demanding people ignore the most fucked up shit any politician has ever done or else they are "the enemy" is 1) absolutely BS 2) creates a lose lose situation for minorities 3) preserving the racist status quo.

(Also, the "Hillary lost because people didn't want to be called racist for voting for her" is so damn dumb, you sound like a conservative who thinks democrat voters act like cartoon caricatures, and you are dancing around her losing due to her alienating entire demographics of voters out of racism/believing she didn't actually have to work to earn their votes)

IF YOU ACTUALLY WANT CHANGE TO COME FROM THESE POLITICIANS, YOU HAVE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THEY LIKE EVERYONE HAVE DONE RACIST AND MESSED UP THINGS, MORE SO THAN MOST OTHERS DUE TO THEIR POSITIONS OF POWER, AND CRUCIALLY, HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE, HOLD THEM TO THEIR PROMISES TO DO BETTER, AND DEMAND THEY CHANGE FOR THE BETTER.

If an establishment democrat presidential candidate actually owned up for the messed up shit they and the party have done and actually worked to make amends to the communities they harmed and actually committed to standing against racism and bigotry, they'd all but instantly be a more moral president than pretty any other.

Calling anyone who talks about bigoted and messed up things Biden has done a Psyop Virtue Signaller faker idiot racist Trump loving fascist is just they way you have chosen to tell minorities "I don't care about the racism or bigotry you face when it's inconvenient for me"

(This was prompted reading the posts of someone who legit believed that Hillary lost because "virtue signaling" progressives (You know they desperately want to call the SJWs like they want to call people slurs) didn't campaign enough for her for free because "they thought she was racist". Completely ignoring the fact that people DID vote for her and She WON THE POPULAR Vote, losing primarily because she lost major states because she ignored entire voter demographics and alienated them with her racist record and thus lost the Electoral College. This person also reblogged posts calling people who reblog posts about Palestine "Pro Pal Fandom" regardless of context or anything, and generally seems to consider that no one legitimately cares about the genocide, and just considers it all an "AstroTurf virtue signal Russian (or Chinese) PsyOp" designed to "cost Biden Voters" because the world Truly revolves around Biden's polling numbers to them the same way conservatives believe international politics revolve around Hunter Biden's genitals)

[notasapleasure]

A tale of two Georgias

Note: I wouldn't normally share subscriber-exclusive content from this news site, but I think Shota Kincha's opinions are too important to hide away in an exclusive email this time. If you're so minded, please consider supporting open journalism in the Caucasus anyway and sending some money OCMedia's way.

Highlighting is my own. Of course I support Georgia joining the EU, but absolutely not under conditions that ignore the recent rolling back of democratic freedoms.

---

By Shota Kincha, for OC Media.

On Wednesday, Georgians celebrated a long-awaited recommendation from the European Commission for their nation’s candidacy for EU membership, leaving the country’s candidacy pending just final approval from the heads of EU member states in mid-December. But the Commission’s assessment of the government’s ‘progress’ seemed to be based on wishful thinking, rather than its actions. 

On denying Georgia the status last year, the European Commission outlined 12 ‘priorities’ Georgia would need to address for the decision to be reconsidered — preconditions that largely reflected the spirit of the April 2021 agreement brokered by European Council President Charles Michel between the government and opposition groups.

When the unforeseen possibility for Georgia to formally apply for membership presented itself in early 2022, Georgia’s leadership had already failed on some of the key components of the previous year’s accord. 

Instead of addressing the ‘perception of politicised justice,’ an apparent euphemism for the imprisonment of opposition leaders, most notably Nika Melia in early 2021, the Georgian court imprisoned another prominent government critic, Nika Gvaramia, only five weeks before the European Commission was due to assess Georgia’s readiness for EU membership candidacy.

Instead of the ambitious judicial reform promised in the 2021 Michel deal and mentioned in the EU’s ‘12 priorities’ last year, the ruling Georgian Dream party has continued to shield corrupt judicial officials with a stranglehold on Georgian courts, resulting in more politicised administrative fines and criminal cases against civil activists, political leaders, media managers, or youth with ‘confused orientation’ who risked their freedom to defend Georgia’s pro-Western choice on the streets.

In the run-up to the European Commission’s latest decision on Georgia, the government and security services run by oligarch Bidzina Ivanishvili’s goons artificially created an anti-Western parliamentary group, gifted them private channel PosTV, and made violent extremist pro-Russian Alt Info immune to obstruction or challenge. 

If the last five years under Georgian Dream rule had been a steady decline in democratic freedoms, the government’s actions in the months since it applied to join the European Union — including their recent initiatives to clamp down on Georgia’s civil society and constrain protest — far surpassed any and all negative predictions.

But listening to President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, one could have assumed she was discussing an entirely different country. 

Despite Georgia’s government persecuting free media, parroting Russian propaganda against the West, refusing to undertake institutional reforms in a way that included other groups and stakeholders, and satisfying only three of the twelve conditions set last year, the European Commission complimented them with no substantial criticism.

I do not believe the EU should approve Georgian membership candidacy later this year, as the move looks set to validate and entrench the government’s precipitous lurch towards authoritarianism. 

The European Commission’s approach may be based on the belief that denying Georgia candidate status could lead to Georgians becoming disillusioned with the EU and the West. But Georgians have been staunchly pro-Western for decades, perhaps even centuries. 

The real danger to Georgians’ trust in the West comes from the West’s indifference to anti-democratic moves by Georgia’s government, which, if left unchecked, will continue to use state institutions to slowly but steadily shift popular mood and policies towards Russia. 

Even were we to allow that recommending EU candidacy status was a justified decision in Georgia’s best interests, doing so did not obligate the institution’s leaders to legitimise the country’s government in the way they did.

Listening to the widely televised announcement by the European Commission on Wednesday, Georgians could reasonably have concluded that democratic backsliding, state capture by big capital, and a politicised judiciary are consistent with Georgia’s pro-Western aspirations, or that related warnings from local activists and media have been baseless or overblown. 

The announcement could also have created the impression that the ruling party has been delivering on reforms demanded by the EU, a powerful notion less than a year before the country’s next general elections. 

The truth is, however, that in inviting Georgia to join the club while neglecting to call out the government’s shortcomings, the EU is playing a dangerous game, and one it has played before. The EU does not want another Orban, and the South Caucasus definitely does not need another Aliyev.

I may be wrong: perhaps granting Georgia candidate status will still be a wise choice on the EU’s part. But even in its recommendation, the European Commission could have sent a clear message that business as usual would no longer be tolerated. 

What Georgia’s leadership heard instead will become abundantly clear in the coming months. 

[britneyshakespeare]

Also wasn't the 2020 election so miserable with how we were all waiting for results for literal fucking days??? Oh my God...