#and so much of the actual political ideology is lost on me Because of the price point

[squintsintwink]

Cyberpunk 2077 is my favorite anti-capitalist game that I spent 70 dollars to play

[weirdmageddon]

the original post i want everyone to see is way out of my hands now, so i’ll repost this again here as new but separate post. it touches on things i want to go into more depth about.

@wasabikitcat gets this idea. this reply—thank you so much for not just understanding what i was going for, but putting my exact thoughts into cleaner words on the bad reading comprehension site.

i can't believe how misunderstood my point was about “spirituality” (i didn’t know it was that much of a loaded phrase!), but thank you for putting what i meant into more nuanced terms.

it's something that can be hard for me to put into words, and maybe i gave people the wrong impression by using the word "spirituality", since words mean different things to different people. i just haven't seen people discussing it so i wasn't sure how to really put it. but regardless of terminology, this reply is exactly what i'm getting at. and this is coming from someone who has a very scientific mind. i wouldnt even consider myself a traditionally “spiritual” person in the normal connotation of the word.

edit: this one as well!

i see this as a cultural/political factor that we shouldn’t ignore, because this sense of meaning has driven people's motivations since the beginning of human civilization.

there's a primal aspect that hasn't really left us but there seems to be no room for it in our modern culture because half of these “guides” seem to be driven by “i cant wait for civilization to collapse so MY ideology can rise from the ashes" and the other half of it seems to be driven by greed. and often they are hand in hand.

i would really like to see actual enlightening ideas stemming from buddhist thought, analytical psychology, collective unconscious, and archetypes to take off in the public consciousness. (completely divorced from jordan peterson. just the original jungian stuff)

i am especially supportive towards getting people interested in carl jung's works. his idea was to get people to understand, "what myth am i living?" based on the same archetypes and symbols that recur time and time again throughout human history that we can all collectively recognize regardless of culture. so it's a sense of meaning based in the self. i don't want people being sent down reactionary paths when looking for meaning in their lives.

i think it would benefit people to who feel lost especially in uncertain/unprecedented times like, with those “there's got to be more to this, something deeper,” insinct. i see that people are looking for this but get taken advantage of or manipulated.

but on this deeper sense of meaning in life thing, the Left isn't doing a great job at providing an option for “lost” people looking for meaning that the Right seems to be having no trouble with. i wonder if this is why we've seen so many of these lost young men flock to reactionary commentators?

this reminds me of an excellent point contrapoints made in her video about jordan peterson, saying,

“The last thing I like is that you talk about deep shit. I was watching a video where you and a couple of zany goons were talking about Plato and Aristotle and the meaning of life. And I thought, ‘Huh… on the Left, we don’t really talk about that kind of thing. All we talk about is how society oppresses people.’ And that might not be enough. Because people need to have a positive purpose in life. I mean, personally, I don’t give a shit. I’m pretty happy to sit here watching the same three seasons of Strangers with Candy until I die. But other people, like Dostoevsky, Camus, other white guys who talk about lobsters…they have this need to have purpose in the face of suffering, and like, not just complain about patriarchy. I guess it’s easier to not complain about patriarchy when patriarchy isn’t the thing that’s making you suffer. But I do think that an education that only teaches people about oppression is inadequate. We spend four years teaching undergraduates why capitalism is bad, and then we say, ‘Well, you’re educated now. Good luck getting a job under capitalism, bye!’ …And that really kind of sucks! But you know, I think that’s a point that can probably be made without comparing transgender activism to Stalin.”

speaking of her, this is a related post i wrote earlier on young men being radicalized and how to approach communication

and by the way, if you are interested in learning jungian psychology and want to see what it’s about, here are some resources to get you started:

i think the jung subreddit has a great collection of resources on its about page.

i highly recommend Demystifying Jungian Psychology to start. it’s meant for beginners. it is available in english and spanish. you can currently find the book in the comments section here. since sometimes these links lead to a 404, i don’t want to link directly to the google drive page. i want you to have a link to the original thread in case it gets broken.

[araguaneys]

I cannot believe the complete disinterest, apathy, lack of empathy and disregard of human lives of a lot of people for my country dying. The way we are talked to and talked over, disrespected and gaslighted by probably half the world, or used in THEIR silly politics games of right and left of heartless leaders they keep voting for in democracy/freedom to choose, a luxury we can't have.

So many people only mention us when they want to make a point about themselves, can't help talking about us without mentioning their countries or the us, you cannot decenter yourself you don't care that we're real people you don't know a thing about us or our culture or all we've lost and gone through. And yet all i can't help thinking and imagining ALL THE TIME is how much worse it must be for everyone else who's the same or worse, like every victim of dictatorship, genocide, conflict, poverty, etc in the world and personally everyone else less privileged than me i just want to say i am so sorry this is the world that you got and im always gonna support and defend you.

This is so telling of these people's activism and empathy and how performative it must be for them/you, i really think you dont care about Palestine or Sudan or Congo, Ukraine etc either you may have SOME empathy for them sure but you dont really think of people outside of yourselves and suffering more as truly equal doesn't matter if you're a poc or not if you still have some privilege and you're not in those situations you just fill your mouth with their names so people think you're "a good person" and you're ready to disregard anyone if you think it's "too complicated to get" or from somewhere that gets called a "leftist" government, the idea that a politician might lie and not actually be a leftist doesn't fit in your brain. WE JUST SAW YOU ALL SPENT WEEKS TALKING ABOUT HOW FAKE AMERICAN LIBERALS ARE bc they are, they pretend democrats are left leaning but they're not both republicans and democrats have the same imperialist right wing policies. THEN WHY CANT YOU UNDERSTAND THIS MIGHT HAPPEN IN OTHER COUNTRIES TO A WORSE DEGREE?

Free Venezuela yesterday and today, you SHOULD all be talking about it, trying to help, speaking to venezuelans and trying to understand and stopping misinformation from non venezuelans i'm never gonna forgive or forget you if you don't.

And ofc free the entire world from their oppressors because i can at least imagine how awful it must be i can at least leave my ideologies aside and listen to someone's struggle without thinking it all must be propaganda if it doesn't align with my experiences you really can't say the same for a lot of people.

[horizon-verizon]

Reasons Why the Westerosi Houses Didn't Overthrow the Targs After they Lost their Dragons

feudal oaths and ideology of loyalty to one's monarch...yes it matters, even though lords have also been known to break oaths or press for their own interests, this is still something considered relatively taboo (remember Ned's hatred for Jaime killing Aerys).....this is still a feudal society, guys.

(if you have in mind that they should have ousted the Targs out of some idea the Targs caused too much havoc or misery to the lords and peasants) #1, the Targs actually provided more years of sustained peace [ozymalek/PheonixAshes] than when the houses were all leaders of kingdoms pre-Conquest [list of a lot of warring across Westerosi relams pre-Conquest], inclu the years AFTER the Dance -- the Targs were "dramatic" but also most of their issues stem from patriarhcal abuses adopted from pre-conquest Westerosi leading into inevitable succession crises...if there ha dbeen no Targs and a Westerosi lord somehow "unifed" the realms through Conquest (even Dorne), you can't tell me there wouldn't be any wars or crises of succession...come on! The War of the Five Kings occurred even without any Targ tomfoolery, bc by then they were long (1 and a half generation away) gone by then.

The Targs were pretty and pragmatically tolerant of nonTarg Westerosi customs and never tried to stop them from practicing MOST (right of first night to be excluded); plus the Widow's Law was pretty beneficial as well.

some houses actually got to become Great Houses or Paramount Houses BECAUSE the Targs made them so: the tullys, the Baratheons, the Tyrells.

Post Dance, Rhaenyra's sons Aegon III and Viserys II were more or less pretty good at keeping things together...Viserys esp so before and during his own reign. And esp by keeping the women of their family out of politics or practicing enough autonomy and authority, since some felt the Dance happened bc they had authoritative and powerful queens (F&B tries to convince use female rulership was a disorderly and dangerous thing) so that the lords or any possible rivals couldn't or had not much to protest, etc.

[radfemsiren]

I know that it's a sacrosanct among radical feminists, but I don't think that witch hunts were intentional persecutions of women.

There were a lot of men burned as witches. In Salem 1/3 of victims were male, in Europe generally around 20% were, and in the East majority of witches burned were male.

This seems like too much male victims for allegedly misogynistic campaign.

Don't get me wrong, I see that even per my words women were harmed more, and yes, it's because of misogyny. But it wasn't the prime reason for witch hunts themselves - they started because of paranoia and religious hatred (it was the time of Wars of Religion and also christianity in 16-17 centuries in all forms was strengthening its chokehold on society). And what is actually almost universal to all victims is that they were considered undesirable by their communities. And yes, since misogyny was commonplace, women were spared less empathy, especially elderly women.

And also the narrative of connection between women and magic of any kind, including healing one, emerged during witch hunts. Before them magic and healing practices were viewed as mostly male thing, and in some parts of my country they still are.

Once again, witch hunts are undeniably a testimony of misogyny of Early Modern Europe, but they weren't some kind of purposefully misogynistic conspiracy. Moids of all groups and ideologies always think of women as morally inferior in their way (fascists think that all womens are commies, atheists think that women are superstitial, christoids think that women are godless, I bet you know this), but saying that all of their political or cultural movements are therefore covers for misogyny is delusional. But the narrative of witch hunts as a campaign against folk healers or some unproven witch cult are IMO pointless because they paint Middle Ages as some feminist utopia (no fucking they weren't, though they weren't a trad dream either), and also operate on comic book logic of some shadowy evil men crafting misogyny in 16th century instead of pointing out how they highlight actual gruesome misogyny of the time.

And also I genuinely doubt that midwives medics of the time were beneficial for women, but accounts of harmful practices that I read were from 19th century, so one can argue that actual knowledge was lost during witch hunts

I feel like that’s what feminists are saying though no? Like the characteristic of the witch-hunts were that it was fanatic mobs persecuting hated groups: and women were the biggest oppressed, hated group. When it comes to the church being threatened by women gaining power and learning medicine, I can’t speak on that because I’ve never researched this topic.

I will say though that the idea of “well all men are misogynistic so calling out specific cultures for misogyny is pointless” is an excuse I really hate. Religious people come to me everyday with examples of specific atheist men that are misogynistic as an attempt at a “gotcha” and its such a logical fallacy. It doesn’t sway me in the belief that a theocracy will always be a thousand times worse for women than a secular government: the overall function and practice of an ideology are what’s important, not cherry picking parts you like or dislike.

There are dogmas that incite hatred and misogyny and punish critical thinking and individual thought: the mechanism of organized religion is one of these. Authority must always be obeyed, and obedience to man and god is the priority. You can sprinkle nice little anecdotes of Jesus being nice to prostitutes (Muslims have similar stories too, like of the prostitute that gave a dog water and Allah forgave all her sins) and still the foundation of Christianity and Islam are clearly antithetical to women’s liberation.

[leninisms]

question how did you start getting into marxism leninism/ political theory in general and why did you gravitate towards that ideology over anither

also answering: howd you start doing political organization and how is it?????

hiiii<3 i love these questions<3 this is going to be long and might read like a memoir because i’m incapable of brevity, but hopefully it’s coherent<3

how’d you start doing political organizing?:

i’ve been reading (political) philosophy for years at this point. i have OCD and one of the primary ways it manifests for me is as an obsession with Being The Most Good I Can Be. i turned to ethics and moral philosophy when i was maybe 13 or 14, and ended up falling in love with every branch of philosophy.

long story short: i am a revolutionary because i want to be and do good, but i want to be and do good because i am a revolutionary.

i joined my college’s socialist student union during my first year and i loved being around other marxists, but it felt like i had just joined a book club. there wasn’t any political action being taken. we’d just meet up and discuss politics and theory. these things are of course important, but they don’t accomplish much of anything if not paired with actual organizing.

when the school year ended and i decided to take some time off, i decided to get more involved in politics. i started looking into all the leftist organizations that were active in my area and reading their programs. most organizations are active on some kind of social media (i used instagram to find them), and generally once you find one local group it’s very easy to find most of the others because they follow each other or collaborate on posts, even when they hate each other.

if you find an org you like, but they don’t have a branch/chapter/network near you, i recommend reaching out to them to see if you can schedule a call with one of their members. i know this is something PSL does and i think it’s very worthwhile for people looking into political organizing. if a call seems scary, look into upcoming events and try to attend a few if you haven’t been already. this can really help you get a feel for how different organizations operate, as well as allowing you to meet members and ask questions.

this is super important: if you join an organization, and then realize you hate it, you can just leave. more importantly, try to identify the things you hated or were uncomfortable with, so that when you join a new organization, you know what to avoid! even more importantly, don’t just swear off organizing forever after one try. most of my comrades were in at least one other org (if not more) before they found our party.

and how is it?:

nothing has helped my mental and physical health the way organizing has. not to be tragic and tortured on tumblr dot com but i genuinely felt so lost and depressed and miserable for so, so long. but i started organizing and suddenly i felt alive and human and like i had a reason to get up in the morning.

my involvement in organizing has helped me improve my social and communication skills. it’s helped me learn and grow in my politics, but also just as a person. i’m happier, i have more energy, i’m more confident and comfortable with myself, i’ve made new friends, and it’s even helped with my OCD. i was detained by the police at a local university’s encampment and when i told my psychiatrist, she told me she was proud of me lmao

this all sounds very dramatic but you can ask anyone who knows me and they’d agree with everything i just said. there was a version of myself that existed before i got involved in organizing, and there is the version of me that exists now.

marxism-leninism?

i am a marxist-leninist for truly so, so many reasons.

anti-imperialism is the most fundamental aspect of my politics, and i could talk about it forever but i’m trying to control myself. u.s. imperialism is responsible for so much horror and bloodshed and suffering around the world, and it must be dismantled. i believe i have a responsibility, as someone living in the imperial core, to oppose u.s. imperialism wherever it exists. that means organizing in support of palestine, sudan, congo, korea, venezuela, cuba, haiti, and every other nation and population that has been and/or is currently being exploited and abused by the violence of the united states.

from mao’s “u.s. imperialism is a paper tiger” :

before this next point, obligatory “this is not criticism of any specific org/party, it is just my experience and opinion” disclaimer.

democratic centralism was something that was very important to me when i was looking for a party to join. i really just felt very opposed to joining any org that struggled with factionalism. for some people this doesn’t matter or seem like a big deal, but it’s always felt important to me that i should be able to travel to any city in the u.s. and be able to organize within the same party.

there are branches of organizations that cannot work with branches in cities 30 miles away from them because they are so fundamentally different. i was able to organize with comrades in a city more than 400 miles away from my branch with no problem.

political education is also very essential to me. i chose to join a political party that emphasized political education, not just for public-facing events, but internally. i wanted to be in an organization where i’m constantly learning. there are so, so many issues and conflicts around the world, and though it’s impossible to know every detail of every struggle, i believe it’s important to have at least a basic understanding of major conflicts, and to stay as up-to-date as possible with global politics.

there are so many wonderful elements of marxism-leninism, so i’m just going to link a couple of resources for anyone interested in learning more:

if leninism is brand new to you, then i highly recommend this 3-part educational series about lenin. this is also available as a podcast on spotify and apple if you prefer.

the state and revolution, v.i. lenin

imperialism: the highest stage of capitalism, v.i. lenin

i hope this answered your questions:) everyone, please feel free to ask me anything about organizing! i love talking about it obviously and will never be annoyed <3

[bestworstcase]

@tumblingxelian from here

As the person who started the "Give that girl a cult" tag, I kind of disagree. RWBY Beyond already made it clear Ruby has a lot of people focused on her in a Great Uniter sense. Add in how many issues she's been having and judging by the movie continues to have with playing the role needed of her. & that there's a nationalistic/fascist movement being aided by the villains & I feel like Ruby being admired not playing into it makes zero sense. The memes of Jax just screaming in frustration cos Ruby is much, much, much closer to the icon he only pretends to be are just memes and not realistic expectations for the volumes story. I should also clarify, cult was just picked cos "Fan club" doesn't have the same connotations.

mm to clarify where i’m coming from, my main point of disagreement with the "ruby gets a [celebrity] cult" angle is with Where and How it will have narrative impact (i think ruby’s celebrity will be more of a personal stumbling block for her tied into the summer rose mystery and an issue that exacerbates the nascent civil war, not smth she can take advantage of in the political conflict vs the crown) and how prominent it’ll be in terms of the amount of specific focus put on people adoring her.

but the main bone i have to pick is with specifically the "ruby is literally going to be deified / silver-eyed ascended savior / tea as communion wine" type stuff (like this other anon) where "cult" is being used explicitly to mean religious veneration. THIS variant makes me want to bite people 

but anyway, to your actual points: i get that the jax meme-ing is largely exaggerated joking around, but at the same time the main thrust of all the real speculation in this vein is that ruby’s celebrity functions to set up a personal conflict between herself and the asturias twins and strengthens her coalition’s hand against the crown because she’s admired, an inspiration to the people, etc. 

in the same way that "salem’s gonna show up a year late with starbucks to explain her ninety step plan for beating the gods" is an unserious joke that follows from things i do seriously believe, that salem’s ultimate goal is to get rid of the brothers and the heroic side will hear her side of the story as probably the last major narrative turning point… no one is joking about jax going "NOOOO!!" while he bleeds supporters to ruby’s accidental cult of personality because they don’t think her celebrity is going to play a meaningful part in defeating the crown, yeah?

i’m also using the memetic joke phrasing in the prev post mainly because i didn’t want to just repeat stuff i’d already said in the one right before, but—well, okay:

1 - the crown isn’t a vanity project. jax is arrogant, but he does also fundamentally believe that he’s doing what is best for his nation; it’s an ideological project. and the ideology is more or less, "vacuo was broken and exploited by foreign invaders long ago. outsiders and those who aren’t willing to fight to the death for vacuo make this nation weak; to become strong again, loyal vacuans must band together to get rid of these people and fight for ourselves and our way of life." when jax imagines the "old ways," he envisions himself as the kind of king who holds himself equal to all his people ("he wasn’t going to hold himself above them")—he’s tying himself in a mental knot here to hold this belief while also putting half his forces under mind control, obviously, but the cognitive dissonance here is buried very deep. 

2 - the MAINSTREAM, NORMATIVE city vacuan cultural view—expressed by many different vacuan characters, including sun—is "we lost our identity and our way of life because people were too soft and content; we let the other kingdoms come here and take what they wanted, and then they left us with nothing but sand, heat, and bitter memories. but hardship and fending for ourselves for so long has made us strong, so we don’t need anyone telling us what to do!" <- i am condensing but much of this is lifted verbatim from the speech sun makes to rally eleventh hour support against the crown. in that speech, he rhetorically equates the twins to the "other kingdoms" who, like the crown, "promised prosperity and paradise."

3 - now. i don’t believe rwby is going to play straight this idea that vacuans were to blame for the conquest of vacuo, because a) the nomadic vacuans in after the fall hold very different cultural attitudes, b) in the 9.11 animatic oscar explicitly refers to all this as a "history of colonization," and c) rwby doesn’t blame faunus for being persecuted or the people of mantle for being repressed, why would vacuo be different?—these are cultural views that i expect to be challenged in v10.

4 - notice how similar these normative/mainstream views are to the crown’s ideology! the crown is more extreme, more violent, but it’s really not that far off from stuff the good-guy vacuans say. before the 9.11 animatic, this was the whole basis for my thinking that the crown would be the arc antagonists in v10—at the end of the book, the defenders turn the tide by flipping the nationalist rhetoric around; ideological victory to the crown. dump tens of thousands of refugees from another kingdom into this situation, and what happens? popular support for the crown explodes. 

5 - BTE is a villain origin story. it’s just the prelude that sets the stage for this explosion of popular support; the main event is in v10, and i think this time the crown is going to be much stronger. in the book, it’s a fringe movement extremists and a roughly equal number of unwilling "recruits" under jax’s thrall, but almost every city vacuan character we meet expresses hostility toward "outsiders" and "traitors" and a lot—not all, but a lot—of what the crown believes is normalized to some extent; a really significant number of vacuans were just one refugee crisis away from breaking for the crown. vacuo has had two refugee crises in swift succession and there’s atlesian and mistrali warships allied with the faction that welcomed the refugees flying over vacuo now.

6 - it doesn’t matter that those foreign ships are there to defend vacuo too; vacuan nationalism is grounded in centuries of colonial occupation and the optics are really, really bad for the coalition. here is what jax is going to be screaming from the rooftops: "half or more of vacuo’s population is outsiders now, people from atlas and vale who never lifted a finger to help us but expect us to sacrifice everything to save them—give up our food and water when we scarcely have enough to sustain ourselves, give up our homes, spill our blood and defend them with their lives. they’re weak, pathetic cowards who came running to hide behind us instead of fighting for their kingdom, and they expect us to believe they’ll fight for us when the time comes? no, they’re just here to do what the other kingdoms have always done to us—they’re the real threat. are we really going to sit by and let these foreign invaders take our country from us again?"—and a lot of vacuans are gonna buy that bullshit.

7 - not least because a lot of it is… kind of true. vacuo has a very long, very real history of suffering at the hands of these other kingdoms whose people it is now being asked to make very real sacrifices for. both CFVY novels emphasize that food and water are already scarce before the kingdom doubles in size and vacuo is weathering onslaught after onslaught of grimm because of the refugees. it’s a really tough situation, and for someone like jax it is a massive political windfall because it’s so easy to twist that reality into a justification for hatred and violence.

SO,

here’s what really stands out to me about the 9.11 animatic and ruby’s celebrity in B4:

nora’s section: establishes that the vacuans are really angry, like "throwing junk at small orphaned children in a screaming rage" angry

oscar’s: the shade coalition is holding on by its fingernails against grimm drawn to the city in droves.

ren’s: the asturias twins get broken out of prison, and he reflects that salem has the advantage because it’s easier to exploit fear and anger than to overcome them. 

winter’s: popular support for the crown is booming ("atlas go home" and "long live the crown" grafitti)… and then the second refugee crisis arrives, provoking what is quite likely another days-long unrelenting assault of the city by grimm. also, when the shade coalition isn’t running itself into the ground fighting grimm, they’re distributing food and water to refugees. (=the crown’s talking point here is "see? they only care about helping THEM, not US")

qrow’s: he feels optimistic because he sees the refugees coming together, trying to support each other through this crisis and atone for past wrongs. the old divide between atlas and mantle is healing. every single character in this section is a refugee, and the "remember her message!" mural seems to be something the happy huntresses organized. 

"it was a relief for us," says nora of reaching vacuo, "but for the vacuans…"

and boba: yang takes ruby to specifically a boba shop that relocated from patch to vacuo after vale was evacuated; so this is likely a neighborhood where a lot of valean refugees settled and that means the vacuans who live here are going to mostly be the type of people who were willing to open their community and absorb that second wave of refugees, i.e. the shade coalition’s support base, people like the nomadic vacuans in ATF who would never be swayed by jax’s rhetoric at all because they weren’t already xenophobic… which BTE implies pretty strongly is a minority position within vacuo proper.

B4 is a character-driven piece focused on ruby’s personal struggle, and the beyond spots are all pretty light, pretty hopeful, and pretty opaque about the situation in vacuo for reasons of being optional side content.

the 9.11 animatic, on the other hand, was meant to be an episode of the show proper, so it does not hold back on the foreshadowing / setup at all: from nora to ren to winter there’s a pattern of escalation with vacuan support for the crown gaining ground, getting louder and bolder, and then qrow’s optimistic conclusion is focused very tightly on the refugees, with an acknowledgment that things are "bad, probably never been worse" beyond the small good he chooses to focus on… which conspicuously does not include any vacuans participating in these small acts of kindness or atonement: it’s klein and willow and the happy huntresses looking out for other refugees.

here’s what i think is going to happen with ruby’s celebrity in v10: the refugees from atlas and mantle will adore her—she’s the girl who rallied the whole world to come help them, and got them out alive when salem attacked and their general lost his mind. the refugees from vale will love her—she’s theirs, after all, born and raised in vale, and look at what she’s started. the minority of vacuans who threw open their doors to welcome the refugees will think the world of her—if atlas hadn’t fallen so quickly, these are the people who would have done whatever they could to send help, and her example is an inspiration. 

and the rest of vacuo is going to fucking hate her. she’s the girl who asked the whole world to come running to help atlas and then the very next day dumped atlas and its problems into vacuo’s lap. is it fair to pin the blame for everything on ruby? fuck no, but she’s the face of this crisis for better and worse.

she’s not a threat to jax; he literally could not ASK for a more perfect scapegoat. she’s the girl from beacon who abandoned her school instead of fighting to save it. (<- explicitly how the crown and basically the entire shade student body views the beacon survivors.) she’s the girl who begged the world to come help atlas and then not even a full day later ran away AGAIN, dumping atlas on vacuo. she’s the reason the sky is crawling with atlesian and mistrali warships. she’s the reason grimm attacked the city every few days for months on end. the satellite she used to send her message is a fuckoff huge battleship looming over vacuo now. she keeps asking vacuans to set aside their differences and work together with the tens of thousands of refugees burdening the kingdom, and all of those refugees think she’s the best thing since sliced bread…

i think ruby will be a polarizing figure—possibly divisive enough that her return might be the final straw that rips the kingdom in half. ’cause like. the people with the most reason to admire her are also the ones the villainous nationalist group despises and wants to get rid of, and the 9.11 animatic flags hard that the crown’s support among vacuans has skyrocketed since the refugee crisis began. they’re not a fringe group anymore.

so on the one hand, the pressure put on ruby is going to be orders of magnitude more intense than ever before because she’s a celebrity beloved by the coalition’s supporters, most of whom are refugees, and between that and finding out vale is just gone now right after getting back, to judge by her characterization in rwby x jl2, ruby is NOT going to be coping well in the wake of her resolution to be all summer was and more. 

and on the other hand, to the crown’s supporters, who could very well now be the majority of vacuans living in the city proper, she’s the perfect scapegoat and they’re going to utterly despise her, inflaming the existing divide and maybe splitting what fence-sitters still remain at this point one way or another. ruby is both the girl who united the world and the girl who tore vacuo apart—rwby does love its contradictions!—which is a) not going to help her mental health situation at all, and b) a problem she and the rest of the shade coalition can only solve by winning the ideological argument. 

to put vacuo back together again they need to beat the idea that "outsiders" make vacuo weak and therefore to be strong vacuo has to drive out everyone deemed un-vacuan. more to the point, they’ll need to overcome the feeling that vacuo is suffering because the rest of the world came together for the refugees. which… is difficult and unfair, because the crown are the ones refusing to play ball and making everything harder than it needs to be, and because if the crown goes into open revolt then the coalition is going to have to fight back and that will make it even harder to make a convincing case that the coalition really does want to be fighting for vacuo, for all vacuans, not against them. it SEEMS impossible. but saving everyone in atlas and mantle seemed impossible, too. 

also, waves vaguely, i expect the vacuo arc will mirror atlas in various ways and this is one of them: the ascendant political movement are bad guys this time, reactionary nationalists, and the heroes are going to defeat them the hard way, no cheating, which will incite the healing of vacuo.

[hiriajuu-suffering]

Kamala aunty and the Hindu vote

Getting this out of the way, I'm voting for Kamala Harris. Biden really should've dropped out two months ago, and there's no other corporate democrat I would really endorse besides her, and not because of the identity politics. Well, sort of. If the Republican primary taught us anything, is a person of South Asian descent will continue to be the ideological punching bag of the white community.

South Asian men get deleted so hard I can't even find a GIF of Vivek Ramaswamy

How Kamala was treated the past four years by the democratic administration of Biden's was nothing short of egregious. Every impossible problem to solve she was blamed for with no tools address the root cause, and she stayed in there looking dumb like a loyal corporate employee. Now the entire system is banking on the political capital they were sweeping from underneath her to stop a literal convicted felon from retaking power and pardoning himself.

Not to mention the states where votes actually mattered 8 years ago were too sexist to put in a woman in power before, so now we're hoping a woman of color would go over better?

Candace Owens already showed how envious she is of Kamala's biracial swag with some really dumb comments.

Her black half isn't what's the issue is, because she embodies a lot more blackness than Asianness in her disposition to the American psyche. And the precedent for half black Presidents that perfectly fall within the cookie-cutter corporate democrat on policy has already been set.

It's her Asian side that might stoke the xenophobia that caused the whitelash red wave of 2016; y'know, because she's going to be subject to nearly the same misogyny Hilary was.

As an Asian-American, Kamala Harris and Andrew Yang weren't just the two candidates I identified most with, they were the best candidates in that primary, period. But they got dismissed and belittled so immensely because of the need to appeal to milk-toast whiteness. Republicans pander hard to grab minority votes, Democrats just avoid putting any minorities in significant positions influence. Don't believe me? Seen any LBGTQ+ positions in real moving and shaking positions?

The DEI stuff the right is going to criticize the entire scope and sequence of how Kamala became the candidate isn't good or fair, but it's not entirely wrong. Because of just how hollow the Democratic Party treats anyone with the poor affliction of being a minority.

There's a key part of the South Asian diaspora Biden lost exactly that Kamala herself is a part of, which makes things interesting to say the least..

Kamala does have the best policy on Israel of any candidate, but that's not saying much since her policy is essentially Obama-lite.

But that means she might lose her own identity vote on just that considering how abhorrently Islamophobic naturalized Indian-Americans have gotten in their support of Narendra Modi

I don't care how effective the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue has been at curbing Chinese aggression, the Nationalist imagery isn't a good sign for any society, really.

Especially when Muslim civil rights in India have all but evaporated. Nikki Haley wasn't particularly bad on Muslim civil rights compared to other Republicans, even as a half-Indian, she didn't buddy up to Modi (probably because he's done more to encourage gender-based violence in India than stop it), and I expect Kamala to actually get the misogynistic slander from conservative Indians because the hyperpatriarchy only comes when it comes to the opposition.

Being half Brahmin though certainly can't hurt her chances with her Hindu base, right? Well, Hindu men certainly have deeper roots in the red pill movement then we'd like to believe, and the first ones they point the finger towards are Hindu women that didn't choose them. Nikki Haley was polling better but Vivek Ramaswamy ate up her press pretty handily. Everyone sees Asian feminine beauty as valuable, but our misogynistic standards prevent us from seeing that type of ethnic image as leadership-worthy.

At least it's not Gavin Newsom. But that might not be enough for South Asian American males dissatisfied with their lot in life. Trump's message is appealing to us because it feeds into our vanity and takes responsibility off us as to why our sisters are meeting the model minority myth and we aren't. While we're not solely to blame, at least the right has some crazy narrative that explains why life didn't turn out to what was expected of us, even if that narrative twists it in a way that will end up just making us feel more isolated, because the right has the most racist women in the country, bar-none.

Well, women on both sides of the political spectrum are equally pretty racist in their courtship preferences, it's just liberal women will explain things in vague externalities and icks rather than being a sign for public restrooms in pre-1963 America.

In either case, this is a biracial black woman who was never in touch with the struggles of an Asian man, never really having been related to one even though she's an Asian woman. To a lot of Asian men, Trump is just more of what we expect of the lunacy of American politics, versus Kamala might be one of those people who actively makes us feel subhuman by being of the same race but still treating us as less than, like many desi women have been doing since biracial marriages within 1st generation South Asian Americans began getting normalized.

The normative view has to become where femininity isn't inherently more attractive than masculinity, especially so that women aren't just fit to be more educated and start making more, but actually lead society in meaningful ways.

I think if you're an AAPI in any capacity and you're not voting for Kamala Harris, you're missing the point somehow. But we're not the movers and makers of these elections, because we always reside in states that are firmly blue or red (well, at least until 2016 when Georgia did a thing). Kamala Harris's black vote definitely extends further than Biden's, but by less than makes actual sense. Can't do much worse than Biden on the Hispanic vote, but Kamala Harris if anyone is how you do that.

So if there's fundamentally just about how identity works in America, we will have a POTUS 47 in 2025. But we've learned the two decades in America has been anything fair to identity. Heck, as a Muslim teacher of a liberal arts content area in a red state I feel at the time. My supervisors won't make exceptions for me they readily make for anyone else, not that they were requirements to begin with, just because my identity bears the ugliest parts of the model minority myth. I don't look Asian enough to be Asian, and the media makes my ethnic identity look to threatening to be trusted with novel ideas, at least.

That's at least something this candidate and I have in common. Biraciality and Multiethnicity isn't well understood in our discussions of intersectionality in social and political discourse. The only people that try to make sense of it are the ones that actively try to erode the ethnic barriers enclaves self-segregate on. Kamala has had to think about that because it's a fundamental part of her identity.

I'm not voting on identity or identity politics, as the right would claim I will. I'm voting because at least this candidate has the capacity to understand me, because they're not a white, entitled, spoiled brat that tried to overthrow the government when he didn't get his way. Y'know, fundamental stuff like that.

Because I'm still American through-and-through, regardless of what my ethnic background is. What's more American than having a minority prosecutor in a liberal enclave? That's literally one of the top 5 career options every desi child is given when they think about their careers.

So yeah, Kamala2024. Bite me.

[sunnist4rs]

Blare White is super misogynistic… he also supports trump. You know the anti abortion, pro rape guy. I think you may be defining who you love/idolize and what you say you think based on who entertains you the most on social media/YouTube and your personal connections rather than really getting into WHY each view is right or wrong factually/ethically, and aiming to be consistent. To be clear I myself am a radfem and (within that) critical of gender ideology I am not trying to convince you to not criticize gender ideology or to not criticize specific trans identified people. Yes: some people Blaire white and that kind of guy opposes are also fucked up people who do harm. But the enemy of an enemy does not alone make a friend and I encourage you to look with a more critical eye at anyone aligned right wing and against women, whether they are novelties or famous on YouTube or whatever else or not

Among other things remember Blaire white is just a man who calls self woman but hates the other men who call themselves women. His critique of them is typically either copied (without him really understanding) from feminist women, or at other times basically rooted in him saying those other trans women are ugly or don’t pass or haven’t done [insert random shit] “Blaire” thinks makes him a real woman and these other trans women into pretenders. It’s just an egotistical man getting attention and money off of this while still claiming he’s a woman and doing so for sexist (“I pass as feminine so that makes me a woman” = sexist) reasons. This issue that is actually impacting women and girls (a category that doesn’t include him)

Thanks for sending me this ask (and being so civil about it). Before I joined the radfem community (and when I wrote my bio) I was pretty conservative but the more evidence of woman’s oppression I’ve seen, the more leftist I’ve become. This has left me feeling kind of lost because the people like Blair White who I used to turn to for comfort on bad days and to hear what I thought were reasonable political opinions no longer click with me. I don’t resonate with her (I’m gonna use she/her even though I’m he’s a dude because I do have that personal attachment right now so it just feels right) beliefs anymore but distancing myself from her feels wrong because she’s been a part of my life for a while, y’know.

I don’t watch YouTube much so I haven’t seen one of her videos since I became a radfem. But, I do remember how my old community used to act so Ik if I did watch another video of hers I’d be disgusted and disappointed by her behaviour (I almost want to avoid watching her at all so that I can keep pretending I align with her side- also I’m aware this is pretty parasocial, I’ll work on that). While I’ve become more aware of this I’ve continued to defend and preach how good her content is as a way of pretending I do still like her to myself. I knew I was doing this but I didn’t really think about it until now.

I’m pretty good at thinking critically about the media I consume, it’s just something I’ve always done when discovering something new to enjoy. But I think Ive developed a blind spot for people I previously loved as while I agreed with them in the past. Now however, me promoting their ideology is hypocritical at best. I’ve been practicing separatism (that’s not the word I want to use Ik it) more and more in my daily life. I now realise the next step I need to take is starting to distance myself from these people as they’re making me into someone I don’t want to be (hypocrites are one of my biggest red flags).

Thanks again for the ask as it’s genuinely helped me uncover a therapeutic break through lol. Whether or not that was your intent it’s definitely gonna help me be a better feminist and improve my life so thanks.

[cypress-punk]

The thing i like about Char Aznable is that he got what he wanted. He killed the Zabis, or at least, 2 out of the 5 but they all died. Only Mineva, a literal infant, survived the One Year War and for all intents and purposes the Zabis that killed his father and robbed him of his birthright are gone. The man won in every way that mattered.

Except.

Now he's got nothing. Char has always been motivated by revenge. He got his revenge. What's left? His dabbling in his father's political ideology and his focus on Newtypes were really only ever dabbles. Had Lalah Sune survived then maybe he would have redoubled his focus on her after the war, but she didn't. So he's left with politics. With Contollism and its focus on independence for Spacenoids and he isn't...really into it. Like yeah he joins AEUG but he does it under a new alias. He calls himself Quattro Bagheena for tax avoidanc purposes instead of Char Aznable or Casval rem Daikun, two names much more famous that would have almost certainly attracted more people to cause. He doesn't tale a leadership role in the organization and instead lets psychos like Wong run it who are business men larping as military commanders. Why? Cause he's looking for a way out. He doesn't want to do this anymore.

And yet he can't help himself. He still has convictions about the rights of Spacenoids. He can't bring himself to do nothing in the face of the Titans, so he acts but not in the capacity that actually retakes that birthright he murdered the Zabis for stealing. Cause he doesn't want it. Doesnt think he deserves it. Part of this is regret at Lalah's death part of it is his own loss of direction after achieving his previous life goal.

In Char's Counterattack we see Char taking up the role of leadership at last but he hasn't done this to become an enlightened newtype leader who will lead humanity into the future as his father dreamed of doing. No its all an elaborate suicide attempt. He is still trying to find a way out. His melancholy over Lalah has only grown. He has become obsessed with Amuro and the idea of the two of them killing one another. He wants absolution and he is, crucially, not in his right mind any longer. Hes lost in the call of Lalah's voice echoing through space. He moves to execute the axis shock because he knows that Amuro will kill him for trying it. Whether it works or not is irrelevant. And he gets what he wants ultimately. He and Amuro kill each other. The Axis Shock is stopped, Neo Zeon collapses again, leaderless, but that wasn't relevant. Char found his way out.

And thats kinda what Char is to me. A vengeful man who got vengeance and realized he didn't know how to live without that mission. Instead of growing beyond it he lets that lack of purpose and his regret at the loss of what he saw as his one shot a future consume him. Its a lovely tragedy he lives through.

[honourablejester]

My thoughts on Ravnica’s Ten Guilds

Since I’m reading through Guildmaster’s Guide to Ravnica for D&D 5e. I have some obvious favourites, but just some general thoughts counting down the line. Also, apparently, some character concepts as well. What I'd play if I was playing this guild. Heh.

Azorius Senate

The Law, capital letters. I have mixed feelings on the Azorius. I tend to have a mildly chaotic bent, so they automatically ruffle my feathers slightly. On an ideological level, they are complicated for me. Especially since they appear, at the moment in time this book is set in, to have lost their foundation and started becoming increasingly autocratic in response. Kneejerk, that inclines me to fight them. Heh.

However. I deeply enjoy investigators, librarians, functionaries and general paper pushers as a character archetype, so I could actually see myself playing an Azorius. An investigator or advocate for the accused or legal secretary who is getting increasingly alarmed at the direction things are going, and who might be looking for ways to investigator or reform the Azorius from within. The Azorius feels like somewhere my favourite knowledge cleric/fey ranger build could do some good. Or a bard. Might be a good place to try a bard. Heh.

Boros Legion

They don’t really spark joy, for much the same reasons as the Azorius. Worse, in some ways, as the Boros are the true enforcing arm. A paranoid military army led by angels that fears it will be undermined from within by corruption and temptation … Not generally my cup of tea, despite being primarily a cleric player.

That being said. A while back I had a thought for a warforged paladin who’d been blasphemously built in the form of an angel. And, well. That could go interestingly with the Boros? Given what they’d likely think about such a creature, especially as paranoid as they are. Did someone commission a blasphemous construct from the Izzet? To what purpose? Sure, she says she only wants to do good, but can we trust her? A warforged redemption paladin who doesn’t know who made her and who genuinely is a good (and trusting) person, but who may actually have been built for a less salubrious purpose. Could be interesting!

House Dimir

Now, see. House Dimir is everything I should adore. Spies! Messengers! Couriers! Lies and secrets and misinformation! Knowledge being power! A guild of assassins and spies disguised as couriers and reporters. Such a juicy tangle. I really should adore them, and kind of do? It’s just. One tiny thing. The Dimir rely on memory magic to hide their dealings, quite casually, and that … can go thorny places for me. They are, in a lot of ways, quite cyberpunk, actually. Mind wiping, implanted memories, orders given by thought transmission. It is cool and thorny and interesting. It just could go bad places for me.

Which is such a shame, as I really want to go play old-school spycraft with these guys. Dead drops and coded messages and deceptively simple orders that have snowballing effects. Maybe not even someone who willingly joined, as such, but who did a favour for someone once and got pulled in progressively deeper, trying desperately to keep their head above water and not let on. Rogue is the obvious first thought, but also I’m thinking GOOlock, because Dimir kind of behave like a warlock patron anyway, in the sense of ‘inscrutable instructions’, and Ravnica also has ‘old gods’, Nephilim, who have equally inscrutable goals. A messenger torn between two equally terrifying and inscrutable masters might be fun! If I play very carefully around the idea that my memories might not be my own.

Golgari Swarm

My far and away favourites! A subterranean undercity built among the sewers and the ruins and the deeper things beneath, full of farmers and sanitation workers and shamans and necromancers. The guild that’s shat on by everyone else, and who patiently wait until the time is right to prove otherwise. Assuming their own factional politics allow, of course. Anyone who knows me, it should be obvious why I love these guys.

Here I would play a rogue. A phantom rogue. Or a gloomstalker ranger. Or a swarmkeeper ranger. Or a spores druid. Or a grave cleric. Or a life cleric. I do suspect this would be the guild I’d play most if I had the opportunity to do so. Lots of options. Though I think swarmkeeper might get first dibs, for, well, obvious reasons. An urchin drawn down into the deeps by the gentle chittering of vermin, the welcome of those equally despised. The artifice and arcane rules of the city above is not for them. There is a simpler, warmer sort of existence down here.

Gruul Clans

Again, mixed feelings here. On the one hand, I feel like Ravnica is playing a little too hard into ‘raging barbarians’ for the Gruul, with the repeated emphasis on just tearing it all down and ‘might makes right’. The Gruul as predators and enemies of all softer or weaker peoples feels reductive. However. This is a power to the image of a people of the wilderness hunted into smaller and smaller reserves, into the rubblebelts and run down sections of the city, into nature restored by tearing the city down to make way for it. There’s something post-apocalyptic about them, both in the sense of their world, the world of nature, having been ended by the city, and then the city in turn being torn down to make way for them again. I feel like if they had a bit more of the Golgari’s ‘it’s all cyclical’ sort of philosophy, plus a little less ‘band of savage warriors led by the toughest and most brutal’, we could really go somewhere with the Gruul. I do quite like the Slizt and Gravel Hide clans, for example.

I would play a Gruul. I don’t know if I’d want to rise within the clans, especially if ‘might makes right’ is the mechanism, but I wouldn’t mind playing a defiant inhabitant of the wastelands, determinedly defending my patch from encroachment, taking pride in survival, in holding to a way of life that the city would destroy. Stars druid, possibly? Or ranger. Or ancestral barbarian. Or wild magic barbarian, the strange, stubborn magic of those places where the city and the wilderness have destroyed each other and become entwined. Yeah, that could be fun.

Izzet League

Ravnica’s mad science guild. BUT. And this is actually the fun part for me. They’re also the guild in (at least nominal) charge of public infrastructure. Plumbing. Transport. Power. Lights. The plumbing for your toilet is in the hands of people who will accidentally clone two million rats in your piping while trying to build a sewage system around the principle of mass shit teleportation relays. Which is fantastic. I love them completely. Second favourite guild after the Golgari. The fact that they’re mostly goblins does not hurt at all. Also, with the current unrest, they’ve all somewhat taken a turn for the Bond villain and are researching superweapons, so that’s extra fun. In the people, again, responsible for your plumbing.

I fully want to start out as a plumber. Attached to the Laboratory of Orientation (aka the teleportation lab). Because, look, a sewage system based on the teleportation of shit is an efficient sewage system! No pooling, no piping, no leaks. Stench teleported away before it gets bad. I’m telling ya, it’s a great idea! Do we necessarily want a bunch of tiny portals honeycombing the structure of our buildings? Absolutely. Don’t even worry about it. I got my engineering degree right here! (Fully a conjuration wizard. Maybe some rogue, maybe some artificer. And yes, they’re a goblin).

Orzhov Syndicate

I mistyped that as ‘sindicate’, which is likely apt, given that they’re mostly an undead banker mafia with a thin veneer of Catholicism on top. Think the Borgias and you’re close. They’re currently getting closer and closer to outright war with the Azorius, because the thin legal veneer over a lot of their racketeering is getting ripped up by the Azorius’ growing paranoia and dedication to writing out loopholes, but for the moment they’re just doing their best to increase the divide between their legal and illegal ventures to hide them better. It’s all very much ambition and greed and a veneer of respectability.

Which is why it baffles me that bard is not a suggested class for them, because whispers bard was my literal first thought. The suggestions are cleric, fighter, rogue or wizard, and I’m baffled, because unless you’re playing a straight enforcer, the Orzhov would seem to be the Charisma-based guild? Deception, Persuasion, Intimidation, no? Whispers bard, conquest paladin if you’re aiming enforcer, assassin or mastermind rogue if you’re aiming for the blackmail route, order cleric or celestial warlock if you want to act the part of churchman better. Orzhov is about vicious social climbing in a system where the top spots are all jealously held by undead oligarchs who most certainly won’t be clearing a path for upward mobility unless forced to do so. My first thought was whispers bard, a lean, handsome young thing who has tasted poverty and will do anything to avoid sinking so low again.

Cult of Rakdos

Not going to lie, I get a strong tang of Warhammer 40K’s dark eldar from the Rakdos. Dark hedonism and violence, the seedy underbelly of the city. They don’t do a lot for me, not gonna lie. They’re probably my least favourite of the guilds. I do like the theatre aspect, the circus of fear, the ideas of ‘backstage’ including basically spycraft, but they’re a chaotic evil guild and it does show.

If I was playing a Rakdos character … guild-owned dark speakeasies are mentioned. And if we’re talking that, something a little noir flavoured … I could be a Rakdos femme fatale, maybe? Less ‘evil’ and more ‘amoral’, a songstress who likes to destroy her enemies in interesting ways. Bard again, possibly glamour bard, although I really like creation bards, and there’s an interesting bit of blasphemy about the song of creation in the mouth of demon-worshipper that could add something. Glamour does work better for the femme fatale, but creation tickles me more. Yeah.

Selesnya Conclave

If the Dimir are giving cyberpunk vibes, the Selesnya are giving me … also cyberpunk vibes, with a solarpunk skin. The ‘city and nature entwined’, green gardens and growing cities, very solarpunk, but the emphasis on collectivism, on the destruction of selfishness and desire, on the subsummation of the individual into the peaceful, coherent whole … there’s a dystopic edge running under them. Less obviously than the Azorius or the Orzhov, but definitely present. (I’m realising that, in MtG terms, I don’t vibe well with White). And, see, I like a lot of their overall goals. I love the natural cities thing, I love striving for overall good. I tend to play neutral good. They just … I get a ‘death of the self’ sort of vibe from them that weirds me out a bit. They seem weirdly more culty than Rakdos to me.

Playing a Selesnya character … I want to be a gardener. No higher ambitions, no greater thoughts. An innocent, who genuinely just wants to help the plants grow. A dreams druid, I think. A gentle druid focused on healing and shelter. And maybe I meet some things for the first time that make me … question. How innocent can you afford to be?

(I am probably being unfair to them, and it probably says a lot about what I’ve been trained to see, given that the Selesnya are broadly good, decent people. I just … I kneejerk distrust it about them. I want to cleave my own path).

Simic Combine

My third favourite guild. Mad science, biology edition! With bonus lovecraftian oceanic vibes. And yes, they are just as dystopic as the Selesnya, and they’ll do it rewriting your body, but I just vibe with them more. I love the zonots. Simic home territories are sinkholes called zonots that pierce through the layers of city and undercity to the buried ocean beneath. Immediately, this adds a whole other layer to Ravnica as a city and a planet for me. The city is at least partly built over top of an ocean. The Simic are also currently divided between the isolationist faction, who believe that slow, cyclical evolution and staying connected to nature will win out, and the adaptationist faction, who believe that we need to evolve now, by hook or by crook, because the system is collapsing and we need to keep up. These are the Simics gearing up for war, by way of aquatic supersoldier experiments.

I think I would like to play an adaptationist spy. Or information-gathering operative, at least, I would want to be a mutated Simic hybrid, so I’m not like Dimir level passing for any old joe soap on the street. I think I’d want to be either an alchemist artificer or a fathomless warlock. Maybe the fathomless, the result of an experiment, more than the one performing the experiments, which would be the alchemist’s wheelhouse.

Other Thoughts

I would so love to play like a Golgari-Simic campaign that’s about exploring the depths of the undercity/underocean for secrets. The zonots and the undercity are so cool. This is a city planet where the city has eaten the world, but strange things lie underneath, and I’m vibing with that so much. We could bring along a Gruul, digging for the foundations of the world that was lost. A Dimir, making sure nobody unearths any superweapons or nothing. Possibly an Izzet, in the hopes that we do. I just really, really, really want an explorer party to go digging under Ravnica.

I also wouldn’t mind a Golgari-Gruul ‘scavengers living on the edges’ sort of campaign, a sort of post-apocalyptic urban scavenger, literal ‘seed of new hope’ where the cycles turn back towards wilderness again.

And then there’s a noir campaign, your Azorius-Dimir-Rakdos sort of game, with possibly some Izzet spice in the sense of ‘why was this Izzet plumber murdered: what did they build or what did they find?’. Heh.

Ravnica does have such a lot to recommend it as a setting. Feelings on WotC aside, this place has such cool, complicated vibes.

This is my VtM Nosfertu talking, though: Golgari for the win!

[letters-to-rosie]

You said last month that it's not Ekko if he's not involved in activism, anarchism, just actively doing shit to make a change. I absolutely agree. But you also said you "come out of a particular background and that means [you] have certain thoughts and approaches to social change that leave out things that others do and are involved in". Would you please elaborate further on that? Not just for writing Ekko, but for the sake of knowing and maybe applying to real life. You made me curious.

So I sat on this for a while not because I didn't want to answer it but because I wanted to answer it thoughtfully, and I've typed out some things that didn't feel right, but I'm going to try again now.

I tried to find the exact context for where I said that and I failed lol so I am working off memory, but again I will try.

So in terms of background, I'm a Black American. When I was young, I pretty much assumed that my family history would be depressing and I didn't want to look into it. And some of that is there: family trees that get lost once you hit enslavement, dysfunction you can pretty much trace right back to that period, having to explain to people that your family is on the light side not because of consensual relationships but because you're from one of those states that exported slaves, you get the deal. A byproduct of this is that by the time I was an adult and wanted to dig into it and found that there was actually a lot to learn, many of the elders I wanted to learn from had passed on.

That, mixed in with me trying to understand my... financially turbulent?? life led me to engage with black radical thinkers as an adult. And that led into left-wing politics in general. So that's like half of it.

The other half is I've always been the type of person who likes a hands-on problem. My approach to social change has always just been "find a problem and throw myself at it." And that translated into a social service background. Even now, to pay for my classes, I work in social services at my university, still throwing myself at a problem that's sort of followed me around for a decade or so now. I'm not in love with the conditions of trying to fight a problem within the walls of an institution that helps perpetuate them, but for me, the immediacy of people's needs supersedes any need I feel for ideological consistency.

On top of that, I study race. And media. So imagine my excitement when I see Ekko!

I don't know that I've ever encountered a character who checked so many boxes. He sees problems and throws himself at them. He practices radical compassion with people struggling with substance use. AND their victims. And even though he's fighting Silco, he knows that the problems in the city go straight to the top (I oughta write a fic someday where he does make it across the bridge and gets to yell at the council because he so deserves that).

He grieves. I've said before that grief is the emotion that has most defined my adult life. I feel like I'm always grieving. And Ekko models how you do that and keep moving. Rather than giving into the hopelessness of the setting, he creates a place where people can heal and be their best selves. AND HE HAS NATURAL HAIR!!! My natural hair journey is another story but it's honestly tied up in all of this lol.

He's like a treasure trove of things that matter to me, honestly. I'm not even sure how much I realized it at first. But as time passed, I'd keep going back to this character and thinking. His revolutionary spirit is truly to be admired. And I think that evolution in how I've thought about him comes through pretty clearly in my writing, as I come to fully embrace a bottom-up style of conceptualizing revolutionary thought and practice. I know I'll grow and change as I get older, learn more, and do more, but at this particular moment, I think Ekko has a lot of value for me.

So what am I not interested in? Off the top of my head...

versions of the character that leave out that political dimension. I'm not inserting politics into the show. The division between what is political and isn't is a false one. If the politics aren't registering, that's because they're close to the politics of the status quo

which is not to say I think everybody has to write him with politics fully foregrounded, but I wish more people would, you know?

and speaking of the politics, not really interested in ones that aren't radical. Not trying to pass a certain purity test, but we can keep in mind that Misfit Toys shows Scar beating up a dummy Enforcer, in gear. Which they probably got by fighting them. Fun!

another thing I think is key and I would like to see engaged with more is that Ekko doesn't view people using shimmer as enemies. I honestly wonder whether the Firelights know as much as they do about Silco's stuff because they have members who formally worked in the syndicate.

and I bring that up because another thing that the show as a whole and Ekko's interactions with Jinx invite us to think about is not viewing anyone as too far gone. I think in the rush to clearly delineate good and evil, we make too many lines and ignore the material conditions that motivate and contextualize people's actions.

and on that note, I don't like to make Ekko a paragon. I think casting him as a pure soul who is working tirelessly for his people ignores his indignation at the situation around him and how he is actively choosing, every day to do the things he does. I like to keep agency foregrounded.

To close, I wanna share some quotes, because y'all know I love reading revolutionaries.

“It is necessary that the weakness of the powerless is transformed into a force capable of announcing justice. For this to happen, a total denouncement of fatalism is necessary. We are transformative beings and not beings for accommodation.” —Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed

“We have chosen a different path to achieve better results. We have chosen to establish new techniques. We have chosen to seek forms of organization that are better adapted to our civilization, abruptly and once and for all rejecting all kinds of outside diktats, so that we can create the conditions for a dignity in keeping with our ambitions. We refuse simple survival. We want to ease the pressures, to free our countryside from medieval stagnation or regression. We want to democratize our society, to open up our minds to a universe of collective responsibility, so that we may be bold enough to invent the future. We want to change the administration and reconstruct it with a different kind of civil servant. We want to get our army involved with the people in productive work and remind it constantly that, without patriotic training, a soldier is only a criminal with power. That is our political programme.” —Thomas Sankara, Speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations

“Let me just say: Peace to you, if you're willing to fight for it.” —Fred Hampton

[understandingbimbos]

So. There's a few things I need to address. My documentation and study of bimbos began as a personal project. I only started a blog because I was putting a ridiculous amount of work and thought into this and figured it should be shared (and still, there's SO much I haven't shared yet...). And that's part of why this blog isn't so well managed, not consistent, and very informal. I write every post with the assumption whoever reading will have some familiarity with the fetish and that was kind of a mistake when dealing with subject matter as delicate as this and if I want to be able to attract literally any other audience. But the blog is here now so its kind of a moot point. I won't be rewriting posts. I want to kill myself every day, its astonishing I can write anything. Anyway, recently I discovered an adult performer named Celestina Blooms, in particular, this video:

We share a lot of the same thoughts. And her criticisms of BimboTok are a lot better articulated. Here are some of things she's said that stood out to me (paraphrased):

"As an actual political movement, the Gen Z bimbo isn't actually very helpful beyond being satire because there are contradictions."

"It makes no sense to be expected to have every single decision in your life, in every area of your life, be a form of activism."

"If you don't spend enough time watching all their videos to completely get the point it looks like they're satirizing the ideologies they're preaching."

"They're kind of taking this thing and being like 'Hey! This thing is leftist because I'm leftist and I said so!' when the thing is still something very tied to a lot of systems of oppression."

"I think there's an issue with saying that being feminine is feminist."

"Because there are so many minors on TikTok they'll come across this trend and see the cute aesthetic and cute clothes, and for good measure, the ideologies a lot of them agree with and be like 'Fuck yes! Sign me up!' and before you know it they're dressing like a bimbo, calling themselves a 'bimbo', and all this stuff while not even being aware of this whole other world of bimbofication as a fetish and unknowingly calling attention to themselves."

She also brings up Pink Bimbo Academy in this video (not by name, and if you somehow see this Celestina, sorry for blowing up your spot!). I bring this up because PBA actually reached out to me like two weeks ago. We had an extremely brief conversation. He lost all interest as soon as he realized my blog isn't primarily about real life bimbos and, like Celestina, I don't believe bimbos are really a real life thing. This is the reason for my last text post (now pinned).

Up until this point I didn't realize Pink Bimbo Academy was a guy, or extremely weird. He's one of those bimbo enthusiasts that genuinely believes every woman should be a bimbo, unless they're trans that is, because according to him a bimbo can't have a penis or possess any "masculine" qualities. He seems to view bimbofication less as a fetish and more of a means to an end. To him, bimbos are the peak of femininity and bimbofication only helps women to become more of who they're "biologically" meant to be. He has entire rants against feminism up on his website and aspires to create an actual real-life bimbo finishing school, like he's a super villain or some shit, like the antagonist of every school-set bimbofication story come to life. And unfortunately, he's basically the resource for bimbofication online. I have to assume not everyone that follows his guides reads all his posts and FAQ but its more than disappointing to have a transphobe be one of the main vanguards of this fetish today.

Anyway, I can't recommend Celestina's video enough. Its a bit long but all worth watching and has made the prospect of writing this book exciting again. I would suggest this video of hers too:

Post-script: After over an hour of writing all of this I realized I actually did something extremely stupid here. Celestina follows me on here, possibly one of the first people to follow me. I kept wondering why one of her icons looked so familiar and it took me until literally just now to figure it out. I hope she doesn't mind the plug, because you all should follow her too!

@celestinablooms Twitter Instagram

[max1461]

I don't want to keep discoursing on evilsoup's post, so I'll make a new home for this sub-discussion here. To reproduce the relevant bits:

@max1461 (me) said:

I find that a lot of anti-anti-civ discourse revives (or perhaps merely continues, since they never really died) the cheapest fallacies of Whig history. There's not merely an acknowledgement of the (true, I believe) fact that industry and modern medicine make the lives of their beneficiaries much better, there is an implicit de facto and sometimes almost giddy dismissal of the value of all that came before. You get the feeling reading a lot of anti-anti-civ commentary that people are itching to condemn anything and everything of the past, and more troublingly any way of life that they personally view as obsolete, just for the sake of it. Just for the discourse thrills. It's reductive and it's unpleasant to engage with.

@sabakos said:

Honestly I have to say that indoor plumbing and modern medicine is good enough that I'd gladly torch even more of what came before and gladly spit in the face of anyone who tried to complain about it. Hypothetically, if the Ancient Greek language had had to be lost for modern plumbing to appear I'd flush the last manuscript of Plato down the toilet and lose no sleep over it. Fortunately, it didn't, but if it did it wouldn't matter.

You can't name one thing that even comes close to billions of people not dying of cholera or starving to death. So it's not surprising that people are eager to shit all over anyone who tries.

@max1461 said:

This is fine but it's totally orthogonal to my point. You acknowledge that Ancient Greek did not in fact have to be lost in order to get modern plumbing, but then gloss over this as if it's a minor aside. No! My point is that internet Whig history enthusiasts sometimes seem to be out to shit on anything and everything that strikes them as obsolete even when it does not need to be lost for the benefits of modern life to be enjoyed, for reasons that seem to me more aesthetic than anything else. Surely not everyone does this, but it's a common enough phenomenon to get on my nerves.

@sabakos said:

It's clearly something that bothers you, so maybe you could give some examples? Because this is all very abstract and I have no idea what you're talking about - based on what you've said here I don't think I've encountered this sort of guy despite being ideologically very similar to how you describe them!

---

There are actually people who think Ancient Greek (read: Inuktitut, Gan Chinese, Oromo) has to die for us all to get indoor plumbing! This is not actually an uncommon shape of opinion for people to hold, in the world at large. There are of course two versions of this, one more harmful than the other but both destructive: "we have to stop wearing kimono and start wearing suits or the Great Powers will never respect us", and "you have to stop holding potlatches in order to become civilized like us".

The point is not that these claims suppose different values than you or I hold, the point is that they are wrong, factually wrong. Unexamined Whig history of the sort which, as I said, sneers at anything that gives off vague whiffs of being "traditional" is making a set of factual errors. It's also often used cynically (as in the second example above) to advance political ends, but that's not really what I'm talking about here. What I'm talking about are people who seem to have a reflexive distaste for anything that appears to them overly sympathetic to the old, any cause with preservationist or restorationist undertones, even when it in no way conflicts with people enjoying the benefits of modern technology. This kind of thinking does active harm in the world. Random tumblr users are of course not likely doing any harm by engaging in it, given that tumblr discourse obviously has no political sway. But it's still frustrating to see a stance that is both incorrect and harmful so casually taken up over (what I perceive to be) petty discourse bouts.

Sometimes, old things are fine, and wanting to keep doing them is fine. When people oppose this, especially on reflexive, aesthetic grounds, I think it is bad.

To be clear, I've never seen anyone in this conversation (you or triv) do any of what I've described here. But I do see it a lot and it kind of drives me up the wall.

[tanadrin]

TBH, in a lot of cases wrt infighting, I think the near group is afraid because of experience with being pushed away from their original goal due to that sort of pressure to self-moderate, where they end up losing because the Moderates won, and I think that's the case with leftists here too.

Like, both in terms of the historical narratives of leftists who "sold out" in the name of realpolitik being the reason why leftists lost, and the visible rage that (at least in their view) following the "vote for the lesser evil" argument is being used to exploit us by a party that has active contempt for leftists that wants to keep us ineffective and trapped with them, if that makes sense?

I think it comes from a deep feeling of helplessness at being electorally trapped the Dems , and I feel like saying "vote against Trump" isn't going to break through to them until folks come up with a genuinely good response as to how they can break out of said trap.

Gotta be clear about terminology here: in the leftist example, the in-group is whatever actual leftist group we're talking about; the near group are people more proximate to them on the ideological spectrum than the far group, but who are definitely not members of the in-group. They are part of the out-group, and thus get treated as opponents. The far group is also part of the out=group, but frequently gets ignored in favor of contests with the near group. Near group and far group were coined as terms to explain why battles between an in-group and out-group often focus heavily on only one subsection of the out-group, even when that subsection in theory might be allies (if not actual members of the in-group) in contests against the other.

I think this fear of losing out to the moderates is very much the in-group perspective, and I think it's wrong. If we're talking about, say, the labor struggles in the US at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century, the "moderates win" scenario (which is ultimately what happened with the New Deal) is a way better deal for labor than the "reactionaries win" scenario. Was it full-on communism? Of course not. But full-on communists never constituted an effective political majority in the United States, and full-on communism was never in the cards as a result; the choice then, as now, is often between "a moderate--even pretty good--outcome, if we play our cards right" and "demanding metaphysical purity to the point that we are politically irrelevant."

Plenty of organizations are happy to maintain metaphysical purity, and to succumb to political irrelevance--it's a surprisingly durable mode of operation if your goal is survival of the organization above all else. But nominally political organizations exist to pursue political goals, and I'm not in favor of strategies that amount to functionally abandoning those goals, in order to maintain in-group cohesion.

Example: the Democratic party is the way it is--i.e., like most political parties, but even more so--because it is a sprawling and often uneasy coalition--broadly speaking between liberals, progressives, and leftists, but each of course can itself be broken down further. The thing with these sprawling and uneasy coalitions is that they often leave everybody mad, because nobody gets everything they want. But also, they work. They are tatical creatures that exist for tactical reasons: I don't expect anybody to look at the Democratic Party platform and go "Yes, this is the One True Good Ideology." And I expect some people will look at the platform they produce and go, "this isn't enough of what I want to justify me supporting this coalition."

But if somebody's problem isn't that they disagree about tactical goals or tactical methods--if their problem is that they reject coalition fundamentally as compromising their ideology--then I do not believe they sincerely want to achieve anything. Because whether it's by electoralism or direct action or violent revolution or civil war, every political struggle in history requires some form of coalition-building. And the guys that build the bigger coalition usually win!

[jewish-vents]

i’m so, so tired. i’ve deleted almost all of my social media apps, barring tumblr. i am definitely a very political person, and have been invested in developed a deeper understanding of world history and geopolitics since i was ~12 (i’m 18 now). but i feel so drained. i’ve muted tags on here relating to palestine and the conflict in general, and i feel horrible about it bc i see people around me constantly posting about it, but i just can’t. i’ve given up. i ideologically leaned far more against the state of israel before oct 7th than i do now, and i’ve seen this amongst many of my jewish friends too. my online friends have always tended to be pro-palestine, but i never saw this much dehumanization coming from them until now. to see how hated jewish people are, to see how many people i loved thought oct 7th was justified resistance… it hurt beyond words… even my longtime irl best friend tried to explain the conflict (and was whining about me getting ben and jerry’s at a store) to me despite not knowing anything about i/p before this war. i hate being talked to like im an idiot. but if i vocalize that, im speaking over others.

i don’t like seeing images of dead children. i don’t like reading about rising death tolls. i don’t like being bombarded with brutal details about humans’ suffering. and that is all everyone online is ever talking about. and all i see people say is that i need to suck it up because there are people suffering way more than me right now, which obviously is true. but i don’t want people to think im a bad, ignorant person. and sometimes i start to believe i actually am. i was very actively posting about the war when it first started, but now as i have seen more and more how cruel people are towards jews i just don’t post much at all on anything besides tumblr. i worry my online friends think i don’t care, and especially that i somehow don’t care about palestinians, when i do, and i always have! but do i have to subject myself to such upsetting information everyday to care? why can i not be afforded a break? why aren’t jewish people allowed to mourn for the loss of life in israel and the hostages without being accused immediately of hating palestinians and wanting them dead? how come non-palestinian muslims are widely allowed to center themselves in this conversation (obviously, muslims are hurting too, though) and talk about their feelings but jews aren’t allowed to? why are jewish people not allowed to feel anything? why must we ignore one group’s suffering and insist that another’s is more important to acknowledge? why?

and i’m just scared, because i don’t know what to believe. maybe israel is somehow doing all these terrible things and im actually evil for doubting it? idk if that makes sense, but it’s how i feel. i’ve witness very disturbing behavior from both zionists and antizionists, and it’s tiring. i have seen members of the former camp saying “there are no innocents in gaza” and members of the latter saying “there are no innocents in israel”. it’s why i can’t really identify with either party, so i feel alone. by its simplest definition i am a zionist, but people have turned that word to mean a million different things that at times it just feels like its lost its meaning. and when i see someone say “zionists dni” on their acc its like… what do you even mean?

i think there are a lot of well-meaning people in the pro palestine crowd, and i don’t think that’s wishful thinking either. though obviously, there are a lot of truly vindictive people out there who have nothing but hatred in their hearts. but i now get anxious to see an account i follow post something pro-palestine. and i feel so horrible about it. i know many of these people have good intentions, but i automatically assume there is something more sinister going on, whether it’s someone i know personally or not posting about it. and i don’t want to! i want to believe most people are good! or at least decent! but i can’t.

i just wish i didn’t have to be bombarded with so much information whenever i log on to interact with fandom posts. but i worry that means i don’t care. but i really think i do… i can’t not care. but sometimes i feel like im not caring enough

.