#and living under the worst economy and government

[cosunter]

awrgh. yahhoo yay

[qqueenofhades]

I don’t have any words right now for what’s happened. Where in the fuck do we go from here?

I don't know. I really, truly don't know. We can't sugarcoat how bad things are going to get, and we can't pre-emptively give into it anyway. This is going to be an unprecedented time in American history (if, sadly, not world history) and the forces conspiring to make you obey will gain much of their power from you doing so in advance, without a struggle. It seems fair to say that America as it has always been historically constituted is over, and may not return in our lifetimes, but we also do not know that for a fact. If nothing else, the fascists will find it very hard to cancel competitive elections, and we cannot sit back, throw up our hands, conclude that voting is clearly meaningless, and let them do that. There are a lot of other things that we need to do, but that's one.

There are various postmortems to be written and nits to pick, but Harris was thrown into an impossible situation and did the best she could in 100 days. Even her critics agree she ran a pretty much flawless campaign. But this country simply decided that a well-qualified black woman could not be preferred over the most manifestly and flagrantly unfit degenerate to ever occupy the office. They decided this for many reasons, not least because large swathes of the country now live in curated misinformation bubbles that, under Government Czar Musk, will only get much, much worse. They were helped by the cowardice and complicity of the "mainstream media" that could have ended Trump's career exactly like they did to Biden after the first debate, but chose to preserve the profits of their billionaire oligarch owners and did not do so, giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and normalization at every turn. They also hounded Biden relentlessly over the four years of his presidency, never reported on the good things he did, and drove him to the historically bad approval ratings lows for a president who was by any metric, quite successful (and will quite possibly be our last ordinary American president for a very long time). Along with the searingly ingrained racism and misogyny and misinformation, Harris could not overcome that.

Democrats clearly had a messaging problem, but it's also true that the country, quite simply, does not care about "democracy" when the economy is perceived to be at stake. Not to over-egg the Hitler parallels, but yeah. This is how Hitler returned to power in 1933 -- on the backs of widespread economic collapse of the Weimar Republic; voters decided they just didn't care about the overtly fascist stuff, which he then proceeded to you know, do with genocidal vigor. Except the American economy in this case was actually doing well, which makes it even more baffling and indefensible. Enough people simply memory-holed Trump's crimes (aided at every turn by SCOTUS, Mitch McConnell not convicting him after January 6, Merrick Garland being far too slow and timid, the corporate media), liked the racist fascist behavior or felt that it wasn't a dealbreaker, and decided that in this election, he was the "change" candidate. It's insane by any metric, but that's what happened.

The country is deeply sick. We do not know what will happen. It's going to get bad. Barring a miracle, we will not have federalized abortion rights again in my lifetime, and there will be widespread attacks on public health, women's rights, immigrants, transgender people, and other vulnerable people. Even and especially the ones who voted for Trump. Never Thought Leopard Would Eat My Face, etc. Alito and Thomas will swiftly step down and allow their seats to be replaced by 40-year old wingnuts hand-selected from the worst the Federalist Society has to offer. SCOTUS is gone for the next generation at least. There is very little prospect of it being ever fixed in the foreseeable future.

Trump will never face a scintilla of consequences for his previous crimes; all the open federal cases will be closed as soon as he takes office and fires Jack Smith. The best we can hope for is that he dies in office, but then we get Vance and the cadre of alt-right techno billionaires ruled directly from the Kremlin. Putin is celebrating this morning and with good reason; he's gotten everything he wants. Trump will egg on Netanyahu in Gaza and abandon Ukraine. Democracy across the world will remain even more fragile and badly under threat. Authoritarians will be empowered and American withdrawal from international systems will percolate in very dangerous ways that cannot and will not be fixed in the short run. I really hope all the leftists who celebrate this as the "defeat of the genocide candidate" will enjoy all the genocide and suffering that's about to come. And yes, I do think the Israel-Palestine war fucked us in a large way. Jewish voters perceived the Democrats as insufficiently pro-Israel due to the presence of far-left antisemitism, even as the far left attacked the Democrats relentlessly and never targeted the Republicans. Arab voters abandoned them, possibly deservedly. What would have happened without the war? We don't know. You get the historical period that you get. Netanyahu and Trump can now do anything they want. Hope it was worth it.

As I said, I can't sugarcoat it. We are going to be paying for this in some form for the next decade, and probably longer. I'm not as absolutely shattered as I was in 2016, but I am much, much angrier. We all thought, we all hoped, America was better than this. It isn't. That, however, is something that has also happened before. What we decide to do next will shape how the next chapter unfolds.

This would be a great time to stock up on needed medicines, renew your passport online, and anything else you need to do in preparation for next year. Many of us simply do not have the wherewithal, whether financial or otherwise, to leave the country. I don't know what will happen with me. I don't know what will happen to any of us. This was utterly avoidable and yet, America didn't want to avoid it. At some point, there's nothing else you can do. You can point to media cronyism, Russian influence, etc etc., but the fact that two of the most qualified presidential candidates who happened to be women have now lost to Trump twice makes it unavoidable. The virulent rightward shift of young men (of all races) in particular paints a grim picture as to how the reactionary misogyny of the 21st century is going to essentially undo most of the progress for social and gender equality in the 20th. The patriarchy has been a problem for most of human history. Doesn't really seem like it's going to change.

The end result of this, however grim: we're still here. We are still living within our communities. If (and this is a big if) Democrats can retake the House, they can put some checks on the process for the next two years. At this point, we are in full-out buying-time, trying-to-prevent-the worst mode. We could have continued fixing things, but we won't be doing that. We will only be trying to preserve ourselves and our friends and our smaller spheres of influence. It sounds very trite to say that we have to have courage, but we do. There's not much else.

It's going to be an awful winter. We have two and a half months to see this coming and know how bad it's going to be, and... yeah. I don't know how soon the buyer's remorse will inevitably set in, but it will. Tough luck, people. You voted for him. You get the country that you decide to have. But the rest of us are also here, and what Gandalf says is still true. We wish the Ring had never come to us, we wish none of this had happened, but we still have to decide what to do with the time that is given to us.

I don't have a lot more. I'll probably be logging off for a while. I don't need to look at the internet for.... yeah, a long time. (Will I do it anyway? Probably.) I don't know what else to leave you with, aside from again:

Do not obey in advance. Do not act as if everything is foreordained and set in stone. Fascist regimes end. They always do. We are going to have to figure out how, and it will suck shit, but the alternative is worse.

Take care of yourselves. I love you.

[matan4il]

My grandparents were all Holocaust survivors. A large part of my family was murdered in that genocide. I chose to deal with the family trauma by becoming an educator on this subject. I give tours, lectures and workshops on the Holocaust, on antisemitism and on Jewish history.

Intellectually, I'm perfectly aware of how the massacre that Hamas perpetrated is NOT like what the Nazis did. More Jews were murdered over the course of just two days in Babi Yar (33,771 men, women and children), which is just one Nazi shooting pit out of almost two thousand, than during the entire Israeli-Arab conflict. Even after the carnage brought on by Hamas, this is still true. The Nazis were far more systematic (which eventually made them turn industrial) in carrying out the genocide of the Jews than Hamas has been. There's no comparison in terms of scale and industrialization.

And yet emotionally, I can't help but be hit by the similarities in terms of the immediate brutality of the murderers and the experiences of the Jewish victims. Because I am listening to the testimonies and some are so eerily similar to my research, I simply can't process how these are from recent days, not 80 years ago.

Jewish kids hiding from their would be murderers, scared to make a sound for fear of being discovered and killed.

Jewish families completely wiped out.

Jews asking themselves how did they survive and the person next to them did not.

Jewish people executed in droves, their bodies piled up.

Jews begging to be spared, to no avail.

Jewish women raped, most of them then killed.

Jewish babies executed in barbaric ways.

Jews being burned, some after being murdered, some while alive.

Jewish communities devastated. Take kibbutz Be'eri for example. It was founded before the State of Israel. Despite many terrorist attacks, it has continued to thrive in Israel's south. A small, close knit agricultural community. Over 100 people (at least) have been slaughtered there. Homes were destroyed. Everything the kibbutz's economy was based on was laid to waste, too. Be'eri has become synonymous with the worst of the carnage. IDK how they'll build their lives again after the war is over. IDK if they can. A community of almost 80 years, quite likely gone.

Foreign reporters who had been to kibbutz Kfar Azza all talked about the eerie silence and the stench of death rising from the bodies. Eerie silence is exactly how visitors to the sites of the shooting pits describe those places, while the allied soldiers who liberated the Nazi camps talked about the stench of death there.

Some of the reactions to this massacre also remind me of the Holocaust. Even though the Nazis, the murderers themselves, documented their extermination of Jews, there are those who deny the Holocaust happened, painting the Jews as liars. Similarly, even though Hamas documented themselves, and released the footage themselves, there are people going around denying the atrocities, painting the Jews as liars.

Then there's the justification of the mass murder of Jews by insinuating they brought it on themselves... Back in 1943, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, aware of the plight of Jews under the Nazis, told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.” Understandable complaints. Understandable complaints of Germans against Jews. Roosevelt, the liberal president, said that while Jews were being exterminated by the Germans. In the same manner, we're seeing people justifying the murder of Jews at the hands of Hamas, even though it's a known antisemitic terrorist organization which has repeatedly called for the murder of all Jews in the world. According to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a reportedly Hamas affiliated Imam declared, "If the Zionist state were to move to the other end of the Mediterranean, our war would not be over, for the enemy is the Jew.

And while I stand by my statement that the scale is nothing alike, the carnage that took place in Israel IS the biggest massacre of Jews since the end of the Holocaust. Not even during Israel's Independence War and some of the massacres of Jews that happened during it (like the Kfar Etzion massacre) were this many Jews murdered during a single day.

Just like so many were silent back then as Jews were being both killed for being Jewish AND blamed for their own murder, many are silent now as well. Don't get me wrong, there are A LOT of amazing people who reached out to their Jewish friends, who showed they care, who took to the streets, who held vigils for the massacre's victims! Many heads of state also condemned this vicious attack. But I'm looking at Tumblr specifically, and it is FULL of posts justifying Hamas' slaughter of Jews. They're being reblogged everywhere, spread in every fandom. People who claim to stand for social justice feel absolutely no shame sharing such de-humanizing posts on their blogs. And what do we do? Are we calling them out? Do we make it clear that it is morally unacceptable to blame Jews for their own murder? Do we unfollow these bloggers, so that at least the dropping numbers send out the message that it is unacceptable to justify the massacre of innocent people?

TLDR:

This massacre is not like the Holocaust, but the cruel antisemitism that motivated it is the same. Let's not let antisemitism thrive here. Please do what you can (whatever that is) to stand for what's right.

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[sprites4ever]

Since I'm A Solution-Oriented Person, Instead Of Crying, Here's What I'll I Advise Every American And Everyone Else, Who Wants To Hear It

GET TOGETHER AND STAY TOGETHER

The Right and Fascists thrive on division of their opposition. Don't preocuppy yourself with infighting.

You never wanted politics to be a fight, but they've made it one. So remember who your enemies are, and what people can achieve when they have a common threat.

If you're in a red state and are fearing for the life and well-being of you and/or people you know, GET OUT NOW. You have a month until inauguration, so, if you can't leave the country, move to a blue state.

While it is, of course, no guarantee for safety against the MAGA cult, the comparatively limited power of the US federal government over citizens and state governments should buy you some time to prepare for a Trump Nazi Regime and/or WWIII or a second US Civil War.

DON'T DENY THE ELECTION RESULT

I know it's comfortable to think that most Americans wouldn't be so insane to re-elect Trump, but that's not true. The race was pretty much 50/50 and winning over the battleground states put Trump over the edge. There's also the fact that, while a ~65% voter turnout is pretty good for a democratic country, that still means that half of eligible American voters did not vote. So, whatever their ideals are, they did not participate in the choice that impacts them, every other American and, due to the US' status, the rest of the world.

Remember, Hitler too was democratically elected. None of the reasons with which Hitler and Trump convinced voters are real things, but still, those voters believed them and made their choice. May they shamefully rot in the worst pages of future history books, but they made their choice.

This is the inherent risk of democracy: That people can always choose to ruin it.

I'M NOT GOING TO MINCE WORDS:

CORRECTION: I previously claimed that the voter turnout was ~50%, when, in reality, it was around 65%. This is strong for a genuine democracy (fake democracies can obviously force people to vote at gunpoint, or just make up voter statistics), but this still means that a third of the country did not vote and that Trump was elected by a third of the country, not even 50% of the population. By that logic, any election with a voter turnout below 100% would not represent the genuine majority, but you get my point. The reality is that both a lot of American non-voters and Trump voters live in rural areas where the rest of the world, outside their community, might as well not exist. So, of course, they can, for example, take Trump's word on the LGBTQ+ community, because they know so little about the world that they can be told anything and also won't vote responsibly, as, if, for example, there's no LGBTQ+ person in their community, they have no way of knowing what these people, their issues and the threats they face actually are like. A lot of voters also don't care about politics and just vote for the guy everyone else is voting for, or the guy who's face they like better. (I'm not making this up, people from multiple countries have legitimately stated that they vote based on politician hotness.) It's strange, because this type of rural unknowingness is usually typical for countries that are undeveloped and autocratic, so one wouldn't expect it from the richest country where the elections define so much. I guess it's the US' federal system and libertarian economy that have led to this extreme compartmentalization of society, where communities are essentially as different from each other as Stone Age-villages.

WITH TRUMP RE-ELECTED, DEPENDING ON HIS CHOICES, THERE WILL BE WORLD WAR III OR A SECOND AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

I'm not paranoid for saying this, as former US Armed Forces Chief of Staff General Mark Milley, who served two years under Trump and Biden, has stated in an interview with The Atlantic that he and others had to stop Trump from launching nuclear missiles at North Korea multiple times in 2018.

ON A POTENTIAL WORLD WAR III

WWIII means a nuclear holocaust, meaning hundreds of millions of deaths around the entire world within half an hour of the war turning nuclear and billions of deaths in the years following, no way around it.

Cities and areas near government and military instalations in nuclear-armed countries (USA, russia, China, Israel, Iran, India, Pakistan, North Korea, United Kingdom and France) will be most affected, but that doesn't mean those will be the only places to be nuked or affected.

Decades of many nations' strategists' deliberations during the Cold War, the period of tension between the US-led NATO and Soviet russian-led Warsaw Pact after the end of WWII in 1945, which in and for itself ended with the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in 1991, came to the same conclusion - If another World War occurs, it will be nuclear and it will be global. It can't even really be called a war, as the world's nuclear powers have had the capacity to annihilate each other's militaries and economies within half an hour ever since 1950.

Since then, WWIII hasn't happened due to powerful people being aware of this and due to multiple courageous individuals who chose right in close calls. For example, President Kennedy maintained a cool head during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, during which, for the uninitiated, NATO and the USSR got extremely close to a nuclear war, as they both deployed nuclear missiles right at each others' doorsteps. In that crisis, too, Soviet Naval Officer Vasili Arkhipov prevented his submarine from launching nuclear weapons at the US when the submarine lost contact with Moscow and other officers thought a nuclear war had started and Moscow had been destroyed. In 1983, when the Soviet Politburo had become so paranoid that they believed their own propaganda about an impending attack by NATO, their nuclear forces were on such high alert that a malfunctioning Soviet spy satellite sending a false alarm about an American nuclear launch nearly caused them to launch in what they thought would be retaliation. At that time, the Soviet Command Officer Stanislav Petrov however figured that the computer at his base, which displayed the warning and which had been installed just the day before, was malfunctioning and chose not to relay the alarm to the rest of Soviet command.

Now, much misinformation has been spread around atomic energy and nuclear weapons. Here's the reality about nukes:

Almost all of the aforementioned nuclear powers have the capacity to launch a nuke at any target in the world within minutes, as nuclear missiles, especially Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) can reach insane hypersonic speeds, faster than anything that could shoot them down before the nuclear warheads start the detonation sequence.

While we're talking about the US, the aforementioned decades of deliberation have concluded that is impossible for any country to fire a nuke without it soon turning into a war between all nuclear powers with their nukes. Nukes are just too destructive for decision-makers to not panic in that event.

The currently existing nukes are spread as follows:

USA: ~5500 nuclear warheads total, how many of those are ready-to-launch is classified, launch means are silo-launched Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles with Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) warheads (meaning one missile can drop nukes on multiple targets), Intermediate-Range Ballistic Missiles (IRBMs), Short-Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBMs), Ground-, Air- and Sea-launched Cruise Missiles, Air-dropped bombs, Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs) with MIRV warheads

russia: ~6000 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are silo- and truck-launched ICBMs with MIRV warheads, IRBMs, SRBMs, Ground-, Air- and Sea-launched Cruise Missiles, Air-dropped bombs, SLBMs with MIRV warheads

China: ~250 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are ICBMs, cruise missiles and SLBMs

Israel: ~100 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are cruise missiles and SLBMs

India: ~100 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are ICBMs, cruise missiles and SLBMs

Pakistan: ~100 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means unknown

United Kingdom: ~200 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are cruise missiles and SLBMs

France: ~100 nuclear warheads total, readiness same as above, launch means are cruise missiles and SLBMs

Iran: Does officially not have nuclear weapons, can factually assemble some nuclear warheads within weeks, launch means unknown

North Korea: Official number of nuclear warheads classified, most likely ~30, readiness unknown, launch means are ICBMs, IRBMs, SRBMs and cruise missiles

Nukes cause unrivaled destruction over tens of kilometers with their explosion, emit a flash of Gamma radiation in the moment of their explosion, cause massive shockwaves and fires, can blind people with the brightness of the flash of Gamma radiation and cause long-lasting contamination with dangerous radiation via fallout.

Gamma radiation caused by the initial nuclear fission of a nuke last extremely short. This radiation is quickly lethal, but so fast that is gone within milliseconds. Anyone too close to the source will, however, be hit by so much of said radiation, that they will get extreme Accute Radiation Syndrome (ARS), also known as radiation poisoning, and die within hours, as Gamma radiation is so strong that, in high enough concentration, it passes through the human body and rips out the electrons from the atoms which cellular tissue is made of, degrading them to Ions. (Hence the term 'Ionizing Radiation')

Ions, unlike atoms, are way less stable, meaning that cellular tissue that has been ionized can't uphold itself and falls apart.

The other type of ionizing radiation from nuclear bombs, Neutron radiation, works the same way, but lasts much longer than Gamma radiation. Unlike Gamma radiation, it sticks to most materials, causing them to give off Neutron radiation for years. This is the radiation hazard that comes from fallout. Fallout is the soot kicked up by the explosion, which originates from everything it pulverized. The immense heat causes it to first be carried upwards, forming the characteristic mushroom cloud, before the air cools and allows the now irradiated soot to fall out (hence the name) and back onto the ground. It is affected by wind and weather.

To avoid both types of radiation, the first factor is distance. Any amount of radiation still consists of individual particles that race through the cosmos, so the further away you are from the source, the less likely for its rays to hit you, as they travel in a straight line.

The second factor is cover. Like everything else, ionizing rays can get through certain things and can't get through others. Gamma rays get through everything with a lower density than multiple centimeters of lead and Neutron rays get through anything with a lower density than multiple meters of concrete. So, being underground or in the center of extremely thick buildings, as well as having resources necessary for survival, is key to surviving radiation after a nuke explodes.

The third factor is time. The human body can withstand different levels of radiation for different amounts of time. The easiest way to figure out how long you can stay exposed to how much, is with a dosimeter.

SO, YES, I AM TELLING YOU TO START DOOMSDAY PREPPING

The essentials, of which you should amass a stock that will last you multiple years in a secure location:

Non-perishable canned food

ABSURD amounts of drinking water

Distilled water for hygiene

Nonperishable Grain-based food

Long-lasting milk

Dried fruit and nuts

Eggs

Flour

Sugar

Honey

Salt

Black pepper (hurts like hell, but can be used as a coagulant to stop wounds from bleeding)

Paper towels

Trash bags

Hygiene gloves

Breathing masks

As much replacement clothing, especially outdoors and warm clothing, as you can get

Water treatment tools

Camping cooking equipment

Easily useable heat sources

Tools (Wrench, File, Screwdriver, Crowbar, Fire extinguisher, Knives, Compass, Hammer, Shovel, Pickaxe)

Physical maps

Hand crank-powered radio

Many spare batteries

Many spare rechargeable batteries

Battery charger

Means of power generation (hand crank, solar)

Flashlight

Radio phone

Backpacks

All the medicines you need

Bandages

Hygiene products

Antibiotics

Medicines against cold

Medicines against diarrhea

Disinfectant

Pastes against insect bites

Pastes against sunburn

Soap

Dosimeter

Geiger counter

Hazardous enviroments clothing

Helmets

Gloves

Cups

Buckets

Canisters for water

History books

Important works

A laptop

A smartphone

A camera (don't need it if you have a smartphone)

Print out important documents on put them in a folder

Analog data storage

Physical data storage (hard drives, flash drives, CDs, SD cards)

Devices to read data storage

Means for self-defense

Emergency plans with people you know

Similarly, a second American Civil War would also need Americans to prepare, in order to survive.

IF YOU LIVE ANYWHERE THAT'S NOT THE US, YOU WILL BE AFFECTED, TOO

Don't think the US are far enough away. Of course, the aforementioned nuclear war would affect you, but a second American Civil War and just Trump being re-elected will, too.

Even without WWIII or a second American Civil War, it's pretty clear that:

In Europe, this will invigorate the similar far-Right movements to bring about similar destructive changes as those Trump wants.

Trump will most likely abandon Ukraine like Afghanistan, meaning russia taking it over and attacking Western European countries afterward. Trump is completely on Putin's side and will also destroy NATO, meaning all of the US' allies, including those in Europe, will be abandoned. I live in Germany, which is seeing a rise in popularity by the far-Right AfD party, and which does not have the military means to defend itself against russian expansionism without the US.

With russia's war against Ukraine, China will feel invigorated to annex Taiwan, and just like with Ukraine, nationalist and authoritarian Trump will not do anything to stop it.

South Korea could be abandoned in the face of North Korea.

Trump will continue to support Israel in the Western Right's extremely hypocritical manner, most likely ordering more US military action in the Middle East.

ULTIMATELY, GIVE THEM THE FIGHT THEY WANT

I know that we liberals, progressives, people who don't care about politics and just want to build their own life and even former conservatives who deemed far-Righters like Trump too radical, never wanted a fight. We never wanted to fight for our values in Western society, against the values of those who demonize us. We were always ready to coexist with them, if only each side kept to themselves with living out its values and didn't impair the other.

But the far-Right fascists and religious zealots, with their leaders who don't mean a word of what they say and say anything they want to get power, have made this a fight. By electing a US President who promised to destroy democracy, eliminate women's and LGBTQ+ rights, oppress non-white ethnicities, censor media, give churches and capitalists unprecedented power and abandon all allied nations, the far-Right has declared war on everyone and everything that's true, moral or even just acceptable. Let's remember that they hate diversity, and that we are from many more groups and walks of life than them. Let's use this to our advantage and show to the fascists what happens when you give different people a common enemy.

[historicity-was-already-taken]

Hi! I really appreciate your nuanced and informed thoughts. Apologies if you've already answered something like this somewhere, but I'm only occasionally on Tumblr these days.

My question is what do you think about calls for academic boycotts as a means of protest? (Against Russia and Israel, most recently - curiously, I've never seen any suggestions for an academic boycott against, say, China, due to persecution of Uygurs and Tibetans. Cynically, I'm guessing this is because Chinese academia is simply too big and too financially integrated into global academic publishing profits for anyone to imagine a boycott, whereas Russian and Israeli academics are much less visible and much less profitable.)

I often sympathize with the feelings of those calling for boycotts, but it feels like it's useless at best and counterproductive at worst to cut off potential regime critics from international support, making them more dependent on keeping the regime happy for funding. I've seen some of what happens in an academic community (Hungary) that is poorly integrated with the international academic community when a repressive government start going after insufficiently nationalist research, and it's not great - entire fields of study the government doesn't like pressured out of existence, or only hanging on because of external EU funding. I have trouble seeing how essentially helping a regime stamp out dissenting voices is a good way to protest that regime. I also fear that if dissenters feel that the international community rejects them and views them as no different from the regime that they will be more likely to embrace apathy for survival.

I'm not sure how to respond to calls for academic boycott in a way that opens dialogue about these concerns, and I also recognize that I may be missing something. I'd love your thoughts on this issue if you have any!

imo academic boycotts are the political equivalent of punching parallel/down.

especially, since, as you pointed out, many academics in the boycotted nations are already dissenters. that said, i do think it's bullshit that these calls for boycotts aren't extended to china.

there's another aspect here, though, which i think was best presented in The Good Place: in a globalized economy, such simple measures as not buying that tomato or using that app or talking to that one israeli medical researcher don't have the impact we'd like to think they do. everything is soo layered and interwoven and codependent and opaque, that we can't truly know what decision we're making and what kind of impact it will truly have without expertise in international finance and tax law and supply chain ethical management.

in our world, as it exists, money and hard power are the only things which will effect change. they're the only things that matter. shitting on some russian grad student who just accessed the closed soviet archive of Khanate-era mongolian literature, or the israeli social scientist researching the intersection of public health and addiction won't do anything, except keep the West in the dark about Mongolian literature, and blocking findings valuable for public management of those struggling with addiction.

if universities and 18-22 year olds want to effect change, go for the wallet. research which defense contractors give money to which university labs/departments, target the administration of those departments, and make as big and loud of a stink as possible. i don't think the individuals calling for these boycotts want to do that though. it's dangerous and scary and requires them to actually put themselves at genuine risk. it's easier for them to just attack academics living under shitty governments, harass jewish students, and call it praxis.

but that's just my (cynical, lowkey depressed) take.

[ashadowofburnedoutstardust]

Random thoughts:

#notaneconomist (although I do thoroughly enjoy strategy) These are just my own personal observations and conclusions

For some reason my mind has wandered over to the state of the US economy, not hard to understand why given the times

It's the circular nature of the US military being the backbone of US financial stability that has for some reason taken the attention of my wandering mind

This is what has occurred to me:

The backbone of the United States economy is of course its military spending

The US military has a budget larger than the five following countries with the highest spends comparatively combined

We should find it unsurprising given that the majority of what is not internal spending is spent on development in terms of building military vehicles, weapons, firearms etc etc and that the majority of this is done within the private sector

For example: OshKosh builds trucks to transport tanks and also many different types of logistic vehicles, Pokémon Go helping to build a massive global spatial map, Angry Birds data being used to help build a surveillance network, Swarovski making riflescopes etc etc

Anyway, things get contracted out to be built right?

Given that most major corporations operate under much larger umbrellas it would make sense that these companies would have an invested interest and whether or not the US government actively keeps military funding high enough for everyone to get a piece of the pie

Given that internal spending on a product usually requires a profit markup I would imagine that the US government in terms of its military spending is not exactly getting bang for its buck.....(And lord knows they aren't spending it on their veterans).....so of course the business lobby wants to help ensure that they keep getting these high priced contracts to keep their profit margins high while having some sort of other, well I guess a front; like kids toys, or a gaming app, or jewelry to help disguise where it is they're getting a lot more of their companies earnings from

The other thing is that the US government needs to justify to the public the monstrosity of a budget for the military, and in order to do that you need to maintain a level of insecurity; not only in their own country by keeping weapons accessible but in other foreign nations by staging military coups, covertly funding terrorist organisations, staging a proxy war etc etc which of course we all know by now that the CIA helps ensure happens in order to "protect American interests"

So to summarise all of that the backbone of the US economy is basically a giant money laundering scheme run through its military in order to fund its business lobby and as long as the rest of the economy underperforms they were always be able to justify having an intensive military spend in order to prop it up

The worst thing that could happen to its economy is the US actually becoming a peaceful state; it seems to me that the recent events over the past couple of years have alerted the working class to the extent of which they are being squeezed in order to fund this business lobby

Unfortunately, this bubble that they have created around themselves will eventually burst

Even the Baby Boomers are starting to feel the pinch of the water in expense of living in this economy that the Millennials and Gen X have been living through; even the conservative working class are starting to turn on the system that they have been living in

The United Healthcare shooting is a prime example of it

It would seem that the ruling class has squeezed a little too hard and inadvertently started the class war they never wanted all under their own gusto

*slow clap*

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

Your countries are being invaded and your too blinded by accusations of "Bigotry" and "Racism" to actually do anything about it. What am I talking about?

-

Let me explain something to the left and any moderate that might have an issue with my framing. These are not people seeking asylum because of persecution. These are economic migrants trying to extract from our countries while their first act in flooding here is economic instability and eventual collapse. It has nothing to do with cultural dislike, or racism of any kind.

Fact is most people in most places hate how their governments are run. The US Gov I can actually weigh in on, because we have sent billions in tax dollars to Ukraine and foreign interests. We have spent millions if not billions on homelessness yet still have a huge homeless issue in places that claim to care about it more than anywhere else.

But what's the issue. 80%-90% of the people coming are military age men. In some cases that percentage is north of 98%. Meaning there are almost never any women or children coming here. And at least in the US they are coming here with their fist act as breaking US law. I live in Texas. This state is heavily affected by illegal immigration. Hard part is, most people don't tend to see the effects until it's too late. The more people that flood your country, the worse the economy in your country will be. Slow trickle can be handled. What we are experiencing can't be. Why?

So not to be the "THER TAKN OUR JUBS", but in reality they are. They will work for lower wages. They don't care if they get healthcare. And the employer does not have to care about the red tape hiring them. They get the profit with almost none of the other complexities that come from hiring a legal citizen. What's more, we barely have enough jobs for the people that live here and yet we flood millions in through the southern border every single year. Functionally, this is an issue. We might be a melting pot, but what happens when our cultures are deleted outright because the flood gets too big?

And this is a real risk. Cultural decimation. These people don't care about their own countries. What makes you think they care about yours? They will extract. Destroy. And they will move on. They don't realize they are doing it have the time but consider the fact that the UN has not helped in this at all. Consider the fact that the WEF has not at all helped in this. The US can hold the population of the world sure, but fact of the matter is that should not be our goal. There are too many cultures, and there are too many offset forms of belief.

We can barely keep our own country working properly and inflation is the worst it's been in almost ever. We can't take care of our own and yet the bleeding heart class in the US just expects us to take in everyone from everywhere at all times. Economically we can't handle this. Socially and culturally we can't handle this. People need to go to countries through the proper sources. They need to do it legally. But what's more, these countries are losing their working age and military age men. IN THE THOUSANDS and MILLIONS. What is the result to the country these people are leaving? What of the women and children left behind?

No one wants to have this conversation because they are scared of being called a xenophobe or a racist. But having love for your country and wanting it to continue to function, and not have your culture crushed under the weight of actual invaders, isn't either of those things. And before you go, "Oh well how dare you call them invaders ~" here is the definition for you.

Look at the second listing. I understand the idea behind wanting others to be happy. I understand the idea behind wanting people from other places to not suffer. But these people are leaving their countries, rather than fighting for them. They have abandoned their mothers, daughters, wives, sisters, aunts, and grandmothers in most cases.

Most of you need to face the reality that the real world is not a fair place. But if you want your country to thrive and survive there needs to be a process in which it functions. These people are ignoring that entire process. If Italy can't deport the people that just arrived on that ship, outnumbering the entire population of the island they just landed on, there will be consequences. And they will not be good. The language will start to shift. The religions in the area will change. The entire culture will change. Then at some point, they will decide, "This is our land now, and it's always been ours". It's objectively conquest by sheer numbers. And while they might not individually have any ill intent. That won't matter in the long term.

This isn't a conspiracy. It's not bigotry. Open a history book and read. I'm pro immigration. 100% I'm for it. But how long are the lines for the people coming here legally? How many people have been denied citizenship over BS reasons? And not only are we allowing illegals in at a more than alarming rate (specifically in the US), but we are spending tax dollars on giving them roofs over their heads, and handouts, and in some places they are even getting monthly allowances.

Explain to me how we are doing this for people with no respect for the country, or it's laws, and yet you can't solve homelessness? You can't make a VA that actually functions properly? You can't get out out of inflation? So to the people cheering on illegal immigration, you are voting for your own demise. And every penny spent on them, is not one spent on a legal immigrant. Every penny spent on them is not spend helping the homeless. Every penny spent on them is not spent on healthcare.

This might be a controversial post and some people may even block, mute or unfollow me for it and that's fine. But history speaks for itself. And every country that has dealt with this for too long has collapsed over time. Pretty much every single time.

You should be concerned. Before you end up as the one who's displaced, and is fleeing.

[dailyadventureprompts]

any ideas for a druid villain who isn't a pro-environmentalism "extremist" who opposes the #just'n'kind authorities and such? i'd like to do one but honestly most suggestions are just to make a fantasy anti-civ unabomber and idk im not too crazy about the concept

Villain: The Eelmonger

While the scholars debate whether it is nature, society, or fate that makes a person cruel, remember my student that none of these things are kind or fair to most whom they govern. -From the diaries of Tarraji, country tutor

Hooks:

Every year a great festival is held across the kingdom to honour the queen's birthday, a tradition started by the previous rulers to celebrate the long-sought birth of their first heir, but maintained by the current sovereign as a means of sharing a little of her prosperity with her subjects, the crown footing most of the bill for the event. This year, just as people (and the party) are crowding into the rivermarket to enjoy the festivities, a horde of grotesque aquatic monsters surge from the water to rampage through the town.

Two days later when the last of the beasts is either slain or driven off, word arrives that similar attacks have occurred all up and down the central waterway, paralyzing the realm's economy and making travel tremendously dangerous. The party could go hunting the worst of the rivermonsters, or they could sign up to protect a daredevil merchant's cargo and make a small fortune crisis trading.

Along with all this chaos an old threat reemerges, pirates with a long hatred of the realm trawling for plunder in the wake of the rampage. Apparently exempt from the wrath of the seabeasts that still lurk in the rivers and canals, they fly a new flag bearing images of sharp-toothed eels, and sing songs in praise of an unseen master.

Dressed like a peasant and exalted by outlaws, the enigmatic figure known only as the Eelmonger has emerged seemingly from nowhere to overthrow the realm and topple the queen from her throne. Who is she? Why her unprecedented attack? How is she able to turn the great predators of the deep into warbeasts bent to her aims? Among all the uncertainly all that can be known is that she has seemingly declared war against the realm, and will not stop till the queen and any who support her have been reduced to meals for the ocean's scavengers.

Background: Sha's parents thought it was very lucky for their daughter to be born under the same stars as the crown princess, as in the old traditions of the kingdom such "celestial siblings" were thought to share their fortunes, and as poor fisherfolk eking out a meagre living from the sea that fortune was dearly needed. As Sha Grew however it became apparent that the stars played a cruel game of favourites, and whatever luck the oneday queen was given was taken in equal portion from Sha's own: The day the princess was thrown from her horse and rose mirraculously unharmed was the day Sha tumbled over the side of her family's boat in a calm sea and somehow broke three bones, the announcement of the king's recovery from the brittle sickness reaching Sha's village the same day they put her long-ailing father in the ground.

These transgressions were manifold, too obvious and cruel to be mere happenstance, and over the years and the grand festival-birthdays Sha's resentment at her distant royal sister and the injustice of fate filed her sharp and cold as a gutting knife. Things paradoxically got a little better during the pirate wars, when those foreign fleets took the town she lived in as their fortress, burning and pillaging many other settlements along the coast and great river. Sha, now a woman grown, felt her fortunes had reversed, as the pirates were all to happy to pay for her catch with handfulls of stolen coin, and her expertise with local cuisine saw her elevated to the position of landbound galleycook, feeding whole crews of cutthroats in between their inland raids.

It was not to last however, after a few brutal years on the defensive, the princess and her allies rallied and launched an offensive that shattered the invader's fleet and ousted them from the lands they'd set to conquer, culminating in a battle that saw Sha's town (and the life she'd built there) burnt to the ground. It was in the midst of that fighting, trapped beneath burning rubble that Sha saw her celestial sister for the first time, glorious and beautiful and totally ignorant of her existence, scaling the ruins of Sha's happiness on her way to future glory. Sha was pinned there for days, forgotten among the rest of the corpses; it wasn't until a great storm broke and washed the wreckage of the battle out into the sea that she was freed, her druidic powers awakening as she drowned and calling out to those creatures of the brine to aid her. Whatever warpath and hope she had for making a good life in spite of her sister she left below the surface, because as soon as she made landfall she started plotting her path back to the queen.

Goals & Schemes:

Ruination: As strong as her monsters are individually or as a horde, The eelmonger knows her beasts can't challenge the might or logistics of an entire kingdom. However, Sha grew up on the kingdom's waterways and knows that just like small tributaries fed the great trade river, the lives of farmers and merchants feed into the strength of the crown. If she has any hope of evening the playing field Sha must break the system that feeds the realm's warchest even if it means breaking the realm itself in the process. Monstrous chaos and resurgent pirates are just the first step: Targeting the merchants will cause supply shortages and beggar the realm, after that she'll move on to sowing famine in the farmlands. When there isn't enough to go round people will break down into factions, causing the army the well trained army the queen has inhereted to crumble before it ever reaches the field.

Fixing the broken scales: Simply killing the queen won't be enough. Sha reasoned out long ago that if she ever did direct harm to celestial sister whatever fate bullshit that connects them would likely redirect the outcome onto her somehow and that just wouldn't do. Instead she has to settle for making the soverign suffer by proxy, all the while searching for some means of attacking the connection itself. Those pirates directly privy to her plan are out hunting for priests and fortunetellers during their raids, anyone they could kidnap and bring back to the eelmonger to help correct this balance.

Saint of the Brine: Though she has no love for gods, Sha's vengeful ascent is watched over by a coldhearted deity of the fathomless seas, who has umbrage with this particular kingdom ever since the queen's ancestors laid claim to its bays and coastlines by slaying a titanic beast she favoured. The eelmonger is her unwitting instrument of wrath, and whether the gods involvement began during Sha's almost drowning or all the way back were praying for a safe birth is impossible to say. Though the eelmonger has unseen aid throughout her campaign against the crown, if the party is able to make their enemy aware that some god may be the source of her misfortune they may be able to divert Sha's wrath from the queen and the realm's inhabitants.

Art

[eaglesnick]

Private Sector Good, Public Sector Bad?

The reigning ideological economic theory within the Conservative Party is, and has been ever since Margaret Thatcher came to power, that “markets know best”

This was made abundantly clear when Kwasi Kwateng, the Chancellor of Liz Truss’s short-lived government, dismissed anything resembling a “planned economy”. Rather, growth and economic success depended on:

“…the power of our treasured free-market economy to leverage private capital and unleash Britain’s unique entrepreneurial spirit to grow new industries." (The Conversation: 13/04/22)

The key words here are “to leverage private capital”. What this means in ordinary speech is to encourage private investors to participate financially in “projects that benefit the economy, society or the environment”.  This has resulted in private investors running (and in many cases, owning) most of our public utilities and services. But rather than “benefit the economy, society and environment" these private investors have devastated it.

Over the next few blogs I intend to look at various British/English public utilities and services and to see how they have fared under the private sector.  First up are the railways.

Britain’s railways are organised within a mishmash of private and public ownership, and has been described as “broken" and no longer fit for purpose.

“The UK's train network is not only one of the worst in Europe, it is also one of the most expensive.” (euronews: 20/05/21

This is no surprise given its complex and chaotic structure.   The railway tracks and rail network are owned and operated by Network Rail, which is a “non-departmental public body of the Department for Transport, (DFT) with no shareholders"

 Non-departmental public bodies are a strange entity. They are national or regional bodies that work independently of government, are not staffed by civil servants, and yet are still accountable to government ministers. It is the Secretary of State for Transport who sets the strategic direction of the railways, allocating funding, and it is the secretary of state  who has to approve major investments in the railway system.

The companies that operate the trains are privately owned and are either awarded franchises from the DFT, or they are “open access” operators that provide passenger services on a particular route or network, but with no exclusive rights enjoyed by franchise holders.

To complicate matters further, the actual trains, passenger carriages and railway wagons, known collectively as “rolling stock”, are owned by the rolling stock leasing companies” (ROSCOs) who lease out their stock to the privately owned rail operating companies.

Freight train operators are totally separate from passenger trains, have no contracts with government but do need permission from Network Rail to run their services.

For year 2022/23 the railways received £11.9bn of government funding and Network Rail has secured £27.5 bn of government funding over the next five years. In short, we the taxpayer invest heavily in our rail network which the private passenger, rolling stock and freight companies use to make a profit.

A 2019 report by the TUC found that:

“Rail firms have paid over £1bn to shareholders in the last 6 years.” (TUC: 02/01/2019)

In 2022 Avanti West Coast received a taxpayer subsidy of £343m, despite having the worst punctuality record amongst train operators and paying out £12m to its shareholders. Avanti West Coast is owned by First Group, who also own Great Western Railway and South Western Railway. Great Western paid out the largest dividend in 2021/22, £33m, while South Western paid out  £13m. 

More recently:

“UK rail operator Govia awards $79m in dividends amid UK rail dissatisfaction.” (Railway Technology: 08/01/24)

Govia is largely foreign owned, the three largest shareholder companies being Australian, Spanish and French. In 2022 it was fined £23m “over financial irregularities" having failed to return £25m in taxpayer funding. Why on earth any government would want to go on subsidising such a company is beyond understanding, especially as the Transport Minister at the time said the company had:

“…committed an appalling breach of trust...behaviour was simply unacceptable and this penalty sends a clear message that the government, and taxpayers, will not stand for it." (BBC News: 17/03/22)

Clearly the minister (Grant Shapps) didn’t mean what he said as Govia is still operating trains two years later and still courting controversy

Turning to the train-leasing companies, we find:

“Profits of UK’s private train-leasing firms treble in a year. More than £400m paid in dividends in 2022-23 while rest of railway faced cuts and salary freezes.” (Guardian: 18/02/24)

These companies saw their profit margins rise to 41%, a profit that we as taxpayers and passengers pay for. It is estimated that "taxpayers are now effectively paying the £3.1bn spent last year on leasing trains.” To actually run a passenger rail service yet not own a single locomotive or passenger carriage is bazaar to say the very least.

Finding overall profit figures for freight train operators is a little more difficult but Colas Rail UK’s revenue in 2022 was £15,529m, up 17% on the previous year, an operating profit of £460m.

 Overall, taxpayer subsidies to the rail industry run at £6bn per year. However, these massive subsidies have not led to lower fares, an end to over-crowed trains, or an efficient service. According to TaxPayers Alliance 02/01/23) "rail subsidies cost taxpayers £1300 each by March 2023.” Meanwhile the private companies that operate the highly fragmented and disjointed system continue to reap profits and pay out dividends.

Maybe this would not be so bad if the British taxpayer subsidised dividend payouts went to British owned companies, but this is far from the case:

“According to the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union, 70% of Britain’s railways are now under foreign ownership to some degree.” (CityA.M.: 11/01/17)

The figure of 70% foreign ownership is disputed, not least because some companies have gone bust since 2017, with five lines now being effectively run by the government as “operators of last resort.”  As the 1993 Railways Act forbids the UK state from running the railways these lines are likely to be franchised out to private firms in the future.

“…many foreign state-owned enterprises of the Netherlands, Germany, France, Italy and Hong Kong now run rail franchises in the UK." (The Standard: 11/05/23)

While other countries have no philosophical problem with running railways for the benefit of their citizens, and clearly have no qualms about investing state money in foreign ventures, the Conservative Party is ideologically opposed to state intervention in running UK public services and is vehemently opposed to setting up a UK sovereign wealth fund.

In summary, successive Tory governments have continued to pay taxpayers money into the coffers of private enterprise regardless of how efficient, honest or effective these firms are at providing an essential public service. Clearly, where the railways are concerned, they are not run to “benefit the economy, society and environment" but for the benefit and interests of private investors, in the mistaken Tory belief that private enterprise is always better than public stewardship despite evidence to the contrary.  

[whereserpentswalk]

Poll to help determine who wins the elections during the final arc of my motw campaign.

It's the summer of two thousand sixteen, and you're a resident of New York city. Strange events have been happening geologically since late twenty twelve. The government has been talking about forces beyond our knowledge, people have gone missing, and now civil war has broken out in Egypt, Britian and New Zealand, with strange talk of them involving ancient gods, vampires, and wizards respectively. And worst of all, from what you know nuclear disaster has claimed St. Luis.

A few weeks ago, mysterious broadcasts have revealed a global conspiracy, and an underground war between those trying to unveil the conspiracy and those trying to maintain it, protests have been sparked throughout downtown Manhattan, the sky has been turned red, and new forces gain power in the city as the American government slowly implodes, and the police are recruited as shock troops by those trying to maintain the veil.

Yesterday it was revealed that the conspiracy was not just one of power, but one of reality, as a fight broke out between protesters utilizing supernatural powers, with a warrior in flaming armor, winged humanoids, and a woman with unnatural speed and invulnerability defended the protests from the police. It has now been revealed that more thinking beings then humanity inhabit this earth, and that magic is provably real, with entire underground neighborhoods existing below the city surface that house many of these beings.

With any semblance of a human government gone, the rebellion against the veil is now holding elections to see who will lead the city after the war is won.

Your Current candidates are:

The Sun Mage- The man who started the rebellion to reveal the magical world to humanity, a sorcerer who defected at the age of nineteen, having trekked across the country, and lost a leg in defense of his cause. He has been known to be idealistic, rejecting formal structure, and refusing to have any sort of headquarters beyond his apartment in Chelse. He's popular among commoners, both in the underground and the surface world, but the military and higher ups in the revolution are skeptical of his ability to organize properly. He appears as a young man, usually wearing a long coat and hat, with a hook prosthetic leg, tan skin, and long hair.

Claire Adams- A human who was once part of a monster hunter organization (seeming tied to several Ivy Legue schools) that maintained the veil, she helped push her organization into the rebellion, and championed radical praxis in order to break the veil and militarization of the rebellion. She is probably the most radical of the rebels, embracing full rights for creatures thought to be dangerous to humanoids, such as vampyrs, demigods and lycanthropes, and possibly even supporting the restructuring of the economy to distribute wealth away from species privileged under the old system and fully integrate humanity into the magical world. She appears as a young woman with pale skin and black hair, seeming to be part of the emo/scene subculture, and usually wearing her full monster hunter equipment and crossbow.

High king Maryanne Obelisk- Once a normal human girl who tried to avenge her brother who was killed for disobeying an order from a sorcerer, she lost her humanity in her quest for vengeance, being bitten by the previous king of vampyrs (Arthur Pendragon) and taking his throne after defeating him and banishing him to England. She is one of humanity's, and many other downtrodden species, biggest defenders, once having been living proof of humanity's competence in the face of magic. She's been the one most willing to respond to disasters, though she has known to be ruthless, and the vampyrs working under her might not share her sense of justice. She is the most beloved of the leaders among human activists. Like all vampyrs, she appears as a humanoid with white scales, a large snake like mouth, and black eyes.

Elric of Vinland- a travel from an unknown place, possibly forwards, backwards or sideways in time (though such things are mysterious even to mages). He's been one of the most aggressive warriors of the rebellion, traveling across the world to start and aid uprisings, and make previously hostile factions sympathetic. Most famously, he helped attack the sorcerer's academies by helping enslaved elves rise up against their masters. He is in direct Legue with the gods, being a paladin of Hel and Lilith, and seems to have experience as a military leader and political actor from wherever he was from. Though the rest of the rebellion has been skeptical of him, commoners amoung humanity and creature alike seem to like him. He appears as a young man with strawberry blond hair, having lost his hearing and disfigured his hands in previous battles, he often wears a futuristic looking uniform, and is able to spawn burning armor when going into battle.

Dr Robert Coleridge- a human handed one of the five most powerful magic items on earth by Jesus of Naseerah (a powerful lich and son of Zeus), transforming him into an ageless genderless being with dominion over magic. He seems to be the most kindhearted of all the leaders of the rebellion, being slow to violence and not wanting to use his powers as a weapon. He's taken power among the harpies, who were once the bankers of the magical world, but have since become the main force funding the rebellion. He does not want to be elected, which might be what makes him the best man for the job. He appears as an unnaturally beautiful androgynous being with glowing eyes, usually wearing a button-down shirt and bowtie.

Grand Inquisitor Espen Hunter- a sorcerer who once was a high-ranking military officer among the forces trying to maintain the veil, who switched sides out of principle when the sorcerous government planned to commit acts of terror and genocide against harpy populations and began conscripting children into the inquisition as part of the late war effort. He is still skeptical of many the rebellion's ideals but will side with them over genocide. For better or worse, he is slow to implement ideas until they are well proven to him. Though other than possibly Elric, he is the cantante with the most experience in government, and other then Robert he's the only candidate above twenty-five. He appears as a warrior in archaic armor, wielding a mace in one hand as a spell in the other, a mask covers his face which was disfigured by an attack spell.

We're sorry you have to vote for people you didn't know existed until now, but this was the only way.

[beardedmrbean]

Many Nigerians have reacted with outrage after a new plane was bought for President Bola Tinubu at a time when the economy is experiencing its worst crisis in a generation.

The purchase comes less than two weeks after thousands took to the streets across the country to protest at rising hunger and the cost of living.

Elected last year to lead Africa’s most populous country, Mr Tinubu has introduced several economic reforms, including the removal of fuel subsidies, which have contributed to high inflation, currently over 30%.

President Tinubu said the reforms were necessary to cut government spending and stimulate long-term growth.

In January, the Nigerian president announced a 60% reduction in the size of official travel delegations, including his own entourage.

However on Monday, the president departed for France using a newly acquired Airbus A330, which has become the latest addition to the presidential fleet of more than five aircraft.

The cost of the plane has not been disclosed, and nor has the reason for his trip.

'I've been sleeping under a bridge in Lagos for 30 years'

Is Nigeria on the right track after a year of Tinubu?

Should I stay or should I go? The dilemma for young Nigerians

X user @Fdmlearn said it wasn’t right that Nigerians were being told to undergo economic pain while the government was buying a new plane for the president.

“Wait so despite the Tinubu led Government telling Nigerians to bear the economic hardship and wait for a better tomorrow, they were busy paying cash for a new private Jet to add to the presidential fleet that has over 6 aircraft’s already?”.

Another X user @RealOlaudah was even more angry.

“Let's tell ourselves the truth. Tinubu's new Airbus presidential aircraft purchase for N150 billion at a time of penury, hunger, and want shows how wicked, selfish, self-indulgent, and insensitive to the plight of the average Nigerian he really is.”

However, @Timi_The_Law says he supports the president’s decision as the plane is not personal but belongs to the office of the president.

“Tinubu's decision to buy a new plane is the right one. The plane belongs to the office of the president, and future presidents will enjoy it,” he posted.

It is not known if lawmakers approved the purchase, which was not mentioned in this year’s budget.

In a statement on X, President Tinubu’s media aide Bayo Onanuga said the new plane would actually save money.

“The new plane, bought far below the market price, saves Nigeria huge maintenance and fuel costs, running into millions of dollars yearly,” the statement read in part.

The new presidential jet was recently released to the Nigerian government after it was seized by a Chinese firm, Zhangson Investment Co. Limited, which obtained a Paris court order to seize some Nigerian government assets following an investment dispute with Ogun state in south-west Nigeria.

The 15-year-old plane is said to have an elaborate configuration for VIPs and replaces the country’s 19-year-old Boeing BBJ 737-700.

Nigerian officials have previously said that the presidential fleet had a high maintenance cost due to the age of its planes.

In June, lawmakers recommended the purchase of two new aircraft for the president and his deputy, saying the old ones were not safe.

Last month, lawmakers passed a supplementary budget, which sought to raise the 2024 budget from 28.7 trillion naira ($18bn; £14bn) to 35.06 trillion naira.

It is not known if the purchase of the new plane was included in this budget.

The BBC has reached out to the Senate President and the Office of the National Security Adviser but is yet to get a response.

[meret118]

Agricultural workers, about three quarters are immigrants and probably about half of them are undocumented. Meat packing is probably between 30 and 50 percent undocumented immigrants. So the whole food supply chain is reliant on people who are going to be rounded up and put in camps.

. . .

That’s the reality. Whether people will grasp that, I don’t know, but they certainly will grasp that Trump said he was going to bring prices down and instead they’re going up. His two big policy goals, policy obsessions, are deporting immigrants and tariffs. Both of those are going to do a lot to raise prices of food and some other things, but the most immediate flashpoint is going to be grocery prices.

Sargent: We face a bit of a communication problem as well in the following way: As you said, Vance is at the forefront of arguing that immigrants are taking American people’s jobs, but that’s actually a proxy argument. It’s Trump MAGA’s way of saying something else but in a more respectable sounding set of tones, right? Trump is clearly communicating with the MAGA base the idea that immigrants are bad, that they’re destructive, that they’re destroying the culture from within, that they’re poisoning the blood of the U.S. They need to be able to soft pedal that to swing voters, right? Because swing voters don’t like the talk about blood dilution and blood poisoning—it’s a white nationalist at its worst. So they try this other argument about jobs. We try to rebut it on the substance, but they’re communicating something else under the surface, aren’t they?

Krugman: Well, it depends on the audience. A lot of Latinos voted for Trump believing that he’s going to reduce the cost of living. They’ll presumably be really shocked when it turns out that he does the opposite, and also when people they know get rounded up, which is going to be another thing that they haven’t really taken on board. For Trump, clearly it is not that he really is concerned that immigrants are taking American jobs. For him, it’s all really blood and soil. And he doesn’t really care whether they’re legal or not. It’s just they’re scary Brown people basically.

. . .

We turned to various kinds of private sector independent measures of inflation, many of which were originally developed by economists in places like Argentina, where manipulation of the data was standard so they developed their own ways to measure. We’re going to be having to do that. My guess is by sometime next year, we’re going to be having to look at proxies for what’s actually happening to the economy, possibly for what’s actually happening to crime, because the official numbers are going to be corrupted.

Sargent: Yeah. And you’re going to see the corruption of information to carry out a large-scale demonization campaign against immigrants as well. We already saw Trump campaign pretty relentlessly on this invented idea of migrant crime, which is absolutely a despicable notion. If we were to generalize about another group that way, no one would tolerate it. But because it’s immigrants and because it’s Trump, everyone just shrugs. We’re going to see government information being corrupted in order to create a bigger impression of migrant crime. I’m talking about people at the agencies flagging particular crimes, and then the White House press operation blaring it out. Something like that.

. . .

But what will happen eventually is that—I don’t quite know how it will work because crime data are initially supplied by local police agencies, but the FBI summaries of that will probably be corrupted quite soon.

Just in general, if what we are actually going to be seeing is inflation, quite a lot of inflation, we’re going to be seeing enormous pressure to report that, first of all, things were worse. The retrospective description of what America was like in 2024 is going to bear no resemblance to the actually pretty good state of the nation right now. Also, we’re going to be seeing a lot of pressure to not admit things that are going wrong.

. . .

Sargent: Yes. You can actually see another alternate scenario as well. Let’s just imagine for the moment that Trump doesn’t actually get that far with deportations because he is going to face serious resource constraints to doing that—blue state governors resisting uses of the National Guard and so forth. Meanwhile, we’re poised for a period of growth. The Biden investments are spurring major new green manufacturing projects across the country. I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that Trump is going to take credit for all of that, and say that his anti-immigrant agenda is producing this boom. That seems like a really undesirable situation politically. What do we do?

Krugman: This has happened before, right? Not so extreme as this one, but Obama laid the foundations for a pretty strong economy during Trump’s first term. Bill Clinton basically balanced the budget, preparing the ground for George W. Bush to blow it on tax cuts. It’s a recurring theme.

. . .

It seems to me there’ll be some legal problems with trying to repurpose military funding. Look, the last thing I want to do is be at all complacent. I think we’re looking at a terrible situation. I just wonder if they are going to run into some trouble.

Krugman: What is this thing you call legal obstacles? It’s not clear to me that rule of law is going to apply at all in the years ahead. It’s very likely that they’ll just find ways to do it. Of course, the costs are ... If you try to do these draconian policies in any remotely humane way, they’re very expensive. Well, the obvious next sentence follows, right? If you’re really prepared to be quite brutal, and basically build tent cities in the desert, maybe not so expensive.

. . .

Sargent: A big open question is: How willing people are going to be to break the law to carry out the Trump-Miller agenda? We really are in a situation where people are actually being recruited expressly for that. You have Steve Bannon and Kash Patel and people like that out there essentially saying, If you’re willing to push the envelope, we want you. And by push the envelope, they mean carry out illegal orders.

Krugman: Yeah. Just bear in mind that a lot of what may happen, beyond the deportations, may not require government actions. If you want to intimidate people, you don’t necessarily have to send in the military, which might refuse to obey orders. You can just do ... January 6 was basically tacit permission for MAGA extremists to go and do stuff. I wouldn’t be surprised to see quite a lot of that happening as well.

[everything-is-crab]

People in America describing white privilege-

1) Yt people have more authority and have their voices represented and heard better

2) Yt people are generally richer than us and do everything in their power to make it harder for people of color to get opportunities to be equally rich and powerful

3) White people shame other people's culture while imposing their own but also get to appropriate others' culture when it feels appropriate for them

Etc etc

When you realize Americans have the same set of privileges and even more of them than rest of the world (including other countries in the global north) they lose their shit over it and call you anti-black or anti-gay or something. As if there's no other country where black and gay people are treated the same way or worse.

You're living in a country with not only the biggest military and economy but a capitalistic and individualistic one. Settle down and stop whining about how your country is worst in the world when that's far from the truth. American privilege means much more than just not being aware of other countries' names (and stop making it seem like even that thing makes you a victim of your government when it doesn't).

Many of you acknowledged under the notes that "US centrism" is a thing. Do you know why that is? Do you think it's random? Use your fucking brain.

Anti-black my ass, you sound like those leftists who dismiss the existence of male privilege by tokenizing moc.

[ecologyalike]

Debt at the heart of the growth paradigm

Before industrialization, much of the world’s population lived in a society with very low per capita economic growth rates. In the 1930’s with the invention of econometrics, economic growth became a symbol of a modern state, and an aspirational goal of the nation to demonstrate progress in comparison to other nations.

However, sustained economic growth comes with an immense social and ecological cost. There is little doubt that increasing pollution and waste generated by the growth economies threaten the well-being of future generations. Likewise, the overuse of the world’s natural resources is eliminating the possibility of people in the majority world achieving the same levels of income as people in high-income countries.

Photo by Alexander Grey on Unsplash  

If the problems of the hegemony of growth are obvious, what is creating a “growth trap” so hard to escape?

In today’s economy money is primarily created through the issuance of loans by the private banking sector. Most of the money circulating in the economy is created by private banks. When a person gets a mortgage to buy a new home, the bank creates a deposit account with an equivalent amount of money in the ledger (no new money is printed).  However, this deposit is equivalent to other types of money, in fact over 99% of total transactions by value in the UK are bank deposits! Only a fraction of the money is physical cash created by the state.

The problem with this type of money production is that we need to maintain a high level of loans to have money circulating in the economy. Understanding how money is created in the modern economy, and the role of debt in the process of money creation, helps to understand one of the key obstacles to escaping the hegemony of growth.

At the individual level, dept economy means that people must constantly work more than they consume, to be able to pay back their loans. Having a shorter working week, and earning less, is not an option if one needs to pay back a home mortgage or student loan. It is difficult to reduce private debt in the absence of growth.

Likewise, in the non-growing economy, the country governments struggle to pay down their public debt and may need to cut spending on education, health care or other social services. Particularly low and middle-income countries, with large debts issued in foreign currency, are often unable to invest in public infrastructure without taking more loans. 

In the worst case to manage their loan payments to international creditors, they must resort to privatising the state assets such as electricity production or drinking water, exposing these “public goods” under speculation of private markets, and making them too expensive to most of the people in the country.

If all loans would be paid back, there would not be money in the economy.

Dept drives growth, which in turn is necessary to avoid financial crises. High levels of public debt mean that growth is the only option to manage the loan without hurting the people living in the country. Likewise, high levels of private debt mean that people have no option other than to continue to contribute their labour to the growth economy.

However, in the current financial system, private banks continue to issue new loans for profit, without any consideration of whether these loans contribute to the economy operating within planetary boundaries or advance equality and social justice.

And while banks and asset mangers cash in profits, the circle of more debt and demands for more  growth goes on and on and on….

References

Escaping Growth Dependency – Why reforming money will reduce the need to pursue economic growth at any cost to the environment by PositiveMoney

https://positivemoney.org/publications/escaping-growth-dependency/

Sovereign Money - An Introduction by Ben Dyson, Graham Hodgson and Frank van Lerven

https://www.insearchofsteadystate.org/downloads/Sovereign-Money,-An-Introduction-Dyson-Positive-Money-2016.pdf

[xoxoauntscripty]

*tw for cannibalism, mass starvation*

So if you've ever wondered, "who has saved the most human lives in the history of ever?"

There are a few people who vie for the spot

But the one you don't expect

is Herbert Fucking Hoover

You know.... One of those old timey U.S. presidents who doesn't seem like he did a fuck of a lot? For whom things like Hoovervilles™ are named?

But Herbert Fucking Hoover

Organized the biggest relief mission in history to that point (maybe ever?)

Saved at least 10 million people

And probably accidentally propped up the Bolsheviks and whoopsies, allowed the USSR to become one of the worst slave states in human history

All before he ever became President

So early Soviet Russia was a giant fucking shit show.

In 1917 you have the people topple the tsarist government, pull Russia out of World War I under some pretty fucking atrocious terms, and basically immediately descend into civil war

(which is a "civil war" in name only, because literally dozens of countries sent troops to fight on one side or another, and is in and of itself an entirely confusing and fucked up time frame I don't understand completely)

And while those two wars are finally over by the end of 1920, the Soviet economy is in shambles

Basically all the grain being grown by peasants was being conscripted by the larger government, in part to feed troops, in part to feed "important people" in the government, in part because that's not your grain, it's the people's grain, and by the people the government generally means "whoever we need favors from at the moment"

There are entire train graveyards because of all the trains that have been blown up or sabotaged across 6+ years of war

Rural people are basically wearing rags, living in shacks, and are Poor As Dirt, except they can't get to the dirt for most of the year because of all the fucking snow

The people producing the food are the people who are already underfed

And then in 1920... The fucking wheat harvest fails

Drought and blight basically fuck an entire seasons harvest all across Russia

And you IMMEDIATELY have a humanitarian crisis on your hands

Hard winter + living in rags + already underfed + crop failure = LOTS of people dying

As in, 10,000 to 100,000 people dying each and every week from starvation

If you look at photos, especially of orphanages, it will make you want to fucking cry, because these kids are walking skeletons

By March 1921 you have tens of thousands of cases of cannibalism, mostly unreported

At least 10 butchers shops have to be closed for selling human meat

Kids are literally afraid to go out alone because bands of roving cannibals are especially prizing the meat of children

And all the while, Herbert Hoover has been sitting on the sidelines practically BEGGING Lenin to let foreign relief in, as long as he can make sure the food is actually being distributed equally among the communities

And in March 1921 Lenin finally cracks and gives the go ahead

Now Hoover was the founder and head of the American Relief Administration, which was a US government relief agency

Keep in mind, 1920 is kind of at the height of the first Red Scare

The pinnacle of pre-McCarthy / pre-Cold-War anticommunist thought

There are leftist strikes all over the place. Coal strikes, steel strikes, even the Boston police go on strike around this time

Conservative/wealthy/powerful Americans are shit scared of the left, especially of socialists

And a good number of people just want to let the communists starve

And even though Hoover is staunchly anticommunist himself, he says fuck that noise, people are dying , and talks Congress into giving a whopping $20M in aid ($307 billion fucking dollars in 2023 money), plus $8M from the US military, along with tons of private donations. Altogether Hoover raises over $78M ($1.2 trillion in 2023) and immediately Gets The Fuck to Work.

And he sends in an absolutely staggering amount of support.

200 American ARA leaders hire 125-150,000 Russians on the ground

Commandeers (basically) over 200 ships

Sends over 912,000 tons of food

Sends over 7,500 tons of medical equipment and supplies

At one point has to convince Russia to unfuck its own railroad system and pay their workers so the grain can actually get anywhere

But it works

They set up twenty thousand kitchens

They start feeding 6 million kids and 4 million adults a day

The supplies help 16,000 hospitals and treat a million patients a day

Ten million fucking people don't starve who absolutely would have without aid

Now. We have to acknowledge that this isn't Hoover alone. Obviously it takes a fucking village to save a nation.

But he was the one who fought for it. He spearheaded it, and organized it.

He was also the one that insisted that along with edible food (mostly corn), the aid package include the wheat seeds to plant for next year's harvest, so this wouldn't be a Permanent Problem.

And lo and fucking behold, by autumn 1922, Russia starts to stabilize its food supply

And the famine begins to end

The wild part of this is that if Hoover, an ardent anticommunist, hadn't spearheaded this, the Bolshevik government probably would have fallen

But he cared more about feeding people than he did toppling a government he hated.

If you combine the 10M people he fed in Russia

The 3.1M children he fed in postwar Finland, Latvia, Poland, Estonia, etc

Sources

Herbert Fucking Hoover may have been (arguably) the person most responsible for saving the most lives in history.

Then afuckinggain

When he oversaw the federal response to the stock market crash of 29 and the start of the Great Depression (as President)

He basically thought that poverty relief would keep people from seeking work?

And thought that monetary and housing relief efforts were the responsibilities of the states, not the federal government?

And so basically his response to "help the banking and economic system is collapsing" was to make sure there were plenty of farm plans available and to try to stabilize businesses, not people? And ignored the fact that the people in charge of those loans were conservative dickheads?

So like. Not Perfect. None of them are.

But 13,000,000 people probably care less about that than about the fact that they lived.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_famine_of_1921

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/famine/

(Note: Herbert Hoover is not the same guy, nor AFAIK even related to, J Edgar Hoover.

That guy was a massive piece of shit.

But that's a story for another day.)

[theworstfoundingfathers]

Who is the worst founding father? Round 4: Thomas Jefferson vs John Jay vs Edmund Randolph

Thomas Jefferson (April 13, 1743 – July 4, 1826) was an American statesman, diplomat, lawyer, architect, philosopher, and Founding Father who served as the third president of the United States from 1801 to 1809. Jefferson was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence. Following the American Revolutionary War and prior to becoming the nation’s third president in 1801, Jefferson was the first United States secretary of state under George Washington and then the nation’s second vice president under John Adams.

Starting in 1803, he promoted a western expansionist policy with the Louisiana Purchase and began the process of Indian tribal removal from the newly acquired territory.

In confidential talks with French consul Joseph Létombe, Jefferson attacked President John Adams and predicted [he] would serve only one term, encouraged France to invade England, and advised Létombe to stall any American envoys sent to Paris by instructing him to “listen to them and then drag out the negotiations at length and mollify them by the urbanity of the proceedings." This toughened the tone that the French government adopted toward the Adams administration.

Jefferson lived in a planter economy largely dependent upon slavery, and used slave labor for his household, plantation, and workshops. Over his lifetime he owned about 600 slaves.

During his presidency, Jefferson allowed the diffusion of slavery into the Louisiana Territory hoping to prevent slave uprisings in Virginia and to prevent South Carolina secession. In 1804, in a compromise on the slavery issue, Jefferson and Congress banned domestic slave trafficking for one year into the Louisiana Territory.

In 1819, Jefferson strongly opposed a Missouri statehood application amendment that banned domestic slave importation and freed slaves at the age of 25 on grounds it would destroy the union.

Jefferson never freed most of his slaves, and he remained silent on the issue while he was president.

Since the 1790s, Jefferson was rumored to have had children by his sister-in-law and slave Sally Hemings, known as the Jefferson-Hemings controversy. According to scholarly consensus…as well as oral history, Jefferson probably fathered at least six children with Hemings.

---

John Jay (December 12, 1745 – May 17, 1829) was an American statesman, patriot, diplomat, abolitionist, signatory of the Treaty of Paris, and a Founding Father of the United States. He served as the second governor of New York and the first chief justice of the United States. He directed U.S. foreign policy for much of the 1780s and was an important leader of the Federalist Party after the ratification of the United States Constitution in 1788.

Jay served as the governor of New York from 1795 to 1801. Although he successfully passed gradual emancipation legislation as governor of the state, he owned five slaves as late as 1800. In the waning days of President John Adams’ administration, Jay was confirmed by the Senate for another term as chief justice, but he declined the position and retired to his farm in Westchester County, New York.

John Jay himself purchased, owned, rented out and manumitted at least 17 slaves during his lifetime. He is not known to have owned or invested in any slave ships. In 1783, one of Jay’s slaves, a woman named Abigail, attempted to escape in Paris, but was found, imprisoned, and died soon after the illness. Jay was irritated by her escape attempt, suggesting that she be left in prison for some time. To his biographer Walter Stahr, this reaction indicates that “however much [Jay] disliked slavery in the abstract, he could not understand why one of his slaves would run away.”

---

Edmund Jennings Randolph (August 10, 1753 – September 12, 1813) was a Founding Father of the United States, attorney, and the 7th Governor of Virginia. As a delegate from Virginia, he attended the Constitutional Convention and helped to create the national constitution while serving on its Committee of Detail. He was appointed the first United States Attorney General by George Washington and subsequently served as the second Secretary of State during the Washington administration.

A scandal involving an intercepted French message led to Randolph’s resignation as Secretary of State in August 1795. Randolph had been tasked with maintaining friendly relations with France. The British Navy had intercepted correspondence from the French minister Joseph Fauchet to his superiors and turned it over to Washington, who was dismayed that the letters reflected contempt for the United States and that Randolph had been primarily responsible. The letters implied that Randolph had exposed the inner debates in the cabinet to France and had told it that the administration was hostile to the country. At the very least, Elkins and McKitrick conclude, there “was something here profoundly disreputable to the government’s good faith and character.”

While residing in Pennsylvania, the 6-month residency deadline for [his slaves] approached. Attorney General Edmund Randolph’s slaves had obtained their freedom under the 1780 law, and Randolph was advising Washington (through Lear’s letters) on how to prevent the eight [slaves] from similarly obtaining theirs.