#and that’s not to even touch the political or economic part of it

[padfootastic]

i just want to put it out there that sirius black is scary as fuck from a purely physical point of view.

he’s tall as shit, has been since fifth year when he got his growth spurt, and he has tendency to loom over most people.

there’s also the matter of his poker face—it’s impeccable, untouchable. can make anyone feel like him stuck to the bottom of his shoe. he learnt it from the best in house black and it’s his default. there’s a reason people are afraid of approaching him, and are slightly awed by james’ ability to unconditionally do so at all times.

his magic is ridiculously sentient. it swirls around him at all times, often feeling suffocating to those near him. he doesn’t even notice how it swells with his emotions, rising in his defence without him having to call it. at times, it can feel like a brick wall, that’s how powerful it is. and it’s cold. people have been known to shiver and turn into metaphorical icicles around him.

and he’s also just intimidating in a—social capital way ykno? so much money, training, and status. it shows. he could be dressed in a potato sack and he’d still reek of royalty. which is essentially what the blacks are.

and this is it u don’t take padfoot into account. this fuckoff huge Grim who’s literally an omen of death, easily twice the size of any human around him, just bounding around with sharp canines on display and malice in his eyes. it’s the easiest thing to piss ur pants when u come into contact w him.

[transmutationisms]

from a non-academic, i find parts of comphet to be useful (heterosexuality becomes compulsory when you’re raised in a heterosexual society) but the foundations . suck. what do we do with theories like this, that have touched on a truth but also carry a lot of garbage? can we separate the truth from the founder?

i have to be slightly pedantic and say that i don't think rich's essay is an example of this phenomenon. my central issue with her formulation is its bioessentialist assumptions about human sex and therefore also sexuality. if i say "capitalism includes economic mechanisms that enforce heterosexual behaviour and exclude other possibilities", then what i mean by "heterosexual" is plainly not the same as what rich means—and for this reason i would seldom formulate the statement this way, without clarifying that i am talking about the enforcement of heterosexuality as a part of the creation and defence of sex/gender categories themselves. so rich and i do not actually agree on the very fundamental premises of this paper! rich was not the first or only person to point out that economic mechanisms as well as resultant social norms enforce heterosexual pairings; i actually don't even think the essay does a very clear job of interrogating the relationship between labour, economy, and the creation of sex/gender; she means something different and essentialist to what i mean by sex and sexuality; and i think her proposed responses to the phenomenon she identifies as 'compulsory heterosexuality' are uninteresting because they mainly propose psychological answers to a problem arising from conditions of political economy. so, in regards to this specific paper, i am actually totally comfortable just saying that it's not a useful formulation, and i don't feel a need to rescue elements of it.

in general, i do know what you're talking about, and i think there's a false dichotomy here: as though we must either discard an idea entirely if it has elements we dislike, or we accept it on the condition that we can plausibly claim these elements and their author are irrelevant. these are not comprehensive options. instead, i would posit that every theory, hypothesis, or idea is laden with context, including values held and assumptions made by their progenitors. the point is not to find a mythical 'objective' truth unburdened by human bias or mistakes; this is impossible. instead, i think we need to take seriously the elements of an idea that we object to. why are they there? what sorts of assumptions or arguments motivate them, and are those actually separable from whatever we like in the idea? if so, can we be clear about which aspects of the theory are still useful or applicable, and where it is that the objectionable elements arise? and if we can identify these points, then what might we propose instead? this is all much more useful, imo, than either waiting for a perfect morally unimpeachable theory or trying to 'accept' a theory without grappling with its origins (political, social, intellectual).

a recent example that you might find interesting as a kind of case study is j lorand matory's book the fetish revisited, which argues that the 'fetish' concept in freud's and marx's work drew from their respective understandings of afro-atlantic gods. in other words, when marx said capitalists "fetishise" commodities or freud spoke about sexual "fetishism", they were each claiming that viewing an object as agentive, meaning-laden in itself (ie, devoid of the context of human meaning-making as a social and political activity) was comparable to 'primitive' and delusory religious practices.

matory's point here isn't that we should reject marx's entire contribution to political economy because he was racist, nor is it that we can somehow accept parts of what marx said by just excising any racist bits. rather, matory asks us to grapple seriously with the role that marx's anthropologically inflected racism plays in his ideas, and what limitations it imposes on them. why is it that marx could identify the commodity as being discursively abstracted and 'fetishised', but did not apply this understanding to other ideas and objects in a consistent way? and how is his understanding of this process of 'fetishisation' shaped by his beliefs about afro-atlantic peoples, and their 'intelligence' or civilisational achievements in comparison to northwestern europeans'? by this critique matory is able to nuance the fetish concept, and to argue that marx's formulation of it was both reductive and inconsistently applied (analogously to how freud viewed only some sexuality as 'fetishistic'). it is true in some sense that capital and the commodity are reified and abstracted in a manner comparable to the creation of a metaphysical entity, but what we get from matory is both a better, more nuanced understanding of this process of meaning-making (incl. a challenge to the racist idea of afro-atlantic gods as simply a result of inferior intelligence or cultural development), and the critical point that if this is fetishism, then we must understand a lot more human discourse and activity as hinging on fetishisation.

the answer of what we do with the shitty or poorly formulated parts of a theory won't always be the same, obviously; this is a dialogue we probably need to have (and then have again) every time we evaluate an idea or theory. but i hope this gives you some jumping-off points to consider, and an idea of what it might look like to grapple with ideas as things inherently shaped by people—and our biases and assumptions and failings—without assuming that means we can or should just discard them any time those failings show through. the point is not to waste time trying to find something objective, but to understand the subjective in its context and with its strengths and limitations, and then to decide from there what use we can or should make of it.

[beardedmrbean]

Centrist Democrats are slamming their far-left colleagues following Election Day, arguing that their emphasis on "identity politics" and other issues handed huge victories to the GOP.

Rep. Ritchie Torres, D-N.Y., argued that President-elect Trump has "no greater friend than the far left." Like-minded Democrats say racial politics, anti-police rhetoric and gender hysteria are alienating millions of voters.

"There is more to lose than there is to gain politically from pandering to a far left that is more representative of Twitter, Twitch, and TikTok than it is of the real world," Torres wrote on X. "The working class is not buying the ivory-towered nonsense that the far left is selling."

Longtime Democratic strategist James Carville put it more bluntly in a Sunday interview with the New York Times, calling "defund the police" the "three stupidest words in the English language."

"We could never wash off the stench of it," he said.

Torres is one of several Democratic lawmakers in both the House and the Senate who have called out his party's "nonsense." One centrist House Democrat complained to Axios on Monday that the "identity politics stuff is absolutely killing us."

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., argued on Sunday that Democrats are "out of touch with the crisis of meaning/purpose fueling MAGA."

"We don't listen enough; we tell people what's good for them. And when progressives like Bernie aggressively go after the elites that hold people down, they are shunned as dangerous populists. Why? Maybe because true economic populism is bad for our high-income base," Murphy wrote.

Not all Democrats are ready to make a change, however. When Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., broke with his party to condemn biological males playing in women's sports last week, he faced an avalanche of hate.

"Democrats spend way too much time trying not to offend anyone rather than being brutally honest about the challenges many Americans face," Moulton said in a New York Times report. "I have two little girls, I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I’m supposed to be afraid to say that."

The statement resulted in calls for Moulton to resign, and at least one of his staffers quit in protest.

Massachusetts state Rep. Manny Cruz suggested Moulton's stance was "a betrayal" in a post on X.

"Congressman Moulton, your commitment then was protecting the LGBTQ community, standing up for their rights, and compassion. Now, on a political whim, our Congressman has betrayed the words he signed onto just last year by scapegoating transgender youth in sports for the failures of the national Democratic Party and leaders to win the presidential election. You said you 'would stand with Nagly and with all our community … against all forms of bigotry, discrimination, bullying, and harassment,'" Cruz wrote. 

Salem city Councilor Kyle Davis, another Democrat, called for Moulton to resign. 

"I’m not looking for an apology from [Moulton], I’m looking for a resignation," Davis wrote in a post on X.

Moulton refused to apologize and instead doubled down in a statement late last week.

"I will fight, as I always have, for the rights and safety of all citizens. These two ideas are not mutually exclusive, and we can even disagree on them. Yet there are many who, shouting from the extreme left corners of social media, believe I have failed the unspoken Democratic Party purity test," he said.

"We did not lose the 2024 election because of any trans person or issue. We lost, in part, because we shame and belittle too many opinions held by too many voters and that needs to stop. Let’s have these debates now, determine a new strategy for our party since our existing one failed, and then unite to oppose the Trump agenda wherever it imperils American values."

[aphrmoosun]

[No words]

NOMAE ; Two Shot!

• Pair.

Noa and Mae

• Movie.

Kingdom of the planet of the apes

• Tags.

NoaxMae, yes it is a ship, dont read if you dont ship them, smutt, au, future, humans and apes politics, ape and human relation, Noa is an inocent ape, twoshot, relationship, Interspecies, strong language, honour apes, writer is not English native speaker, if you see errors tell me, etc

• Other Nomae fic.

You and Me

• Part 1.

DO NOT COPY OR SHARE IT ELSEWHERE WITHOUT PERMISSION!

Yours [second part]

The ape and the human were forced to commit to each other. Not that they were really forced, since after their first physical encounter, both were in agreement that their lives were dedicated to each other.

Noa's father was the one who opposed it the most. It wasn't normal to see a formal wedding between an ape and a human, but the political pressure around him, along with his own son's, had been enough to convince him.

For Mae, her life was starting to sound different. No interested boy came near her again. In fact, no boy at all. Noa had promised his father that he wouldn't touch her until they were married, and Mae didn't agree with that at all.

After that night, with barely an hour together, she had already gotten used to his hands and the way he touched her. And he refused to do it. Mae always initiated the approach. First, silly kisses, then touches on his hairy chest, and when she tried to go lower, Noa would run away to the nearest bathroom.

But that had to end.

Their wedding was being prepared by professionals hired by their parents, with a formal and political theme that came with it, which meant that their wedding would take place within two months to give them time to prepare everything.

Mae was sure she could corrupt her fiancé. She just needed a moment alone with him, in an intimate setting, with no one around to listen.

To do that, she planned the ice cream plan. With the excuse of wanting him to try that human gastronomic wonder, Mae managed to convince him to let her visit him at his home.

She had already bought the ice cream, and her hand trembled with excitement as she knocked on Noa's door.

He was the one who received her with a tender look. Mae hugged him, leaving the ice cream aside. Although the ape only half-responded to the hug, she didn't let go.

"Come, let's go to the living room."

Mae observed the house with curiosity. Due to the clan leader being close to humans and having economic power, there was a lot of human technology in the house, from TVs to computers and even a roomba.

"Are we alone?" Mae tried not to sound too excited.

"Yes, my mom went shopping, and Dad is never home during the day."

Noa could be so innocent when he wanted to.

For a moment, she felt bad about her plan to seduce him, but then she thought that it wouldn't hurt him, she just wanted to do what engaged couples did.

Noa led her to the living room, offering her a seat next to him.

"Here, I brought two types of ice cream for us to eat together."

She handed him a chocolate ice cream and took a tutti-frutti one for herself.

She watched him sniffing the ice cream, analyzing it with his gaze, and that made her laugh.

"Go on, try it. It's good."

Noa took her advice, taking a spoonful to his mouth, and she imitated him with her ice cream.

That's when she started to put her plan into action.

She knew Noa loved to look at her, especially her eyes, and she would take advantage of that. She lowered her gaze to her ice cream and left the spoon in her mouth, playing with it with her tongue. She didn't need to look at him to know he was watching her.

"Mae..."

"Yes, Noa?"

She felt him move uncomfortably on the couch.

"Are you going to give me some of that?"

"Hmm, yes, of course."

She took another spoonful of ice cream and brought it close to the ape, but when he was about to try it, she dropped the spoon, making the contents spill all over Noa's chest and lap.

"Oh, sorry."

"Don't worry, it was nothing."

He was going to clean himself with his hands, but she stopped him, grabbing them.

"Let me help you, it was my fault."

The human didn't think twice. She bent down to reach the ape's chest and started licking the ice cream. She knew how hairy apes could be, but it didn't bother her; on the contrary, that act had given her the opportunity to get close to his nipple, licking it in the process.

"Mae!"

Noa got up from the couch, leaving her leaning forward over it.

"We can't do that."

She couldn't respond because the ape was already heading towards another room in the house.

She assumed it was the bathroom, since he always did that every time she suggested something sexual. Mae suspected he was hiding his erection from her or going to relieve himself alone.

She wasn't going to let him do that this time.

She followed him closely, seeing that the room was his bedroom, with a door that he had closed behind him.

Mae tried to open the door, but Noa had locked it. So, surrendering, she sat on the ape's bed and was able to observe the room more closely.

There were posters of sci-fi movies featuring apes and humans. Others were of music groups.

But her gaze fell on the TV. The ape had a TV with a DVD player in it. And then it came to her mind. Noa had learned to touch her by watching a porn movie, which she assumed the ape still had.

She searched through the drawers of the nightstand, didn't find it. But she saw a box next to the closet, so she decided to look there.

Among music discs and Blu-ray movies, she managed to see a very graphic cover.

Happy, she jumped up and put it in the player.

In the movie, two humans could be seen. A boy on top of a girl. He was kissing her breasts and touching her while penetrating her with two fingers.

Mae felt a tingling sensation in her crotch and sat on Noa's bed. His bed. It was soft and smelled like him. She lay down on the bed, feeling his scent.

The room was filled with the girl's moans from the movie. And Mae couldn't resist anymore. She put a hand under her pants, moving her underwear aside, and started touching her clitoris. She caressed herself softly, feeling the wetness in her parts already.

She moved her head, resting her nose on Noa's pillow, and breathed in his scent. The movie faded into the background, her mind going back to the moment when Noa watched that movie, thinking of her. He must have masturbated watching it, thinking of how he would do all that to her.

"Noa, Noa."

She closed her eyes, letting go. Her free hand went up her jersey and bra, leaving one breast out, which she started to massage and touch with the rhythm of her other hand.

She was about to come. Her fingers moved faster, imagining they were Noa's. And with him in her mind, she came violently on his bed.

"Noa!"

That scream tore through her throat, unable to keep quiet.

The orgasm tensed her body, making her arch her back and close her legs abruptly due to the tension.

After a few seconds, she tried to calm her breathing. And when she could open her eyes, she found Noa in front of her.

"Noa." -she whispered, taking her hand out of her pants and trying to lower her bra.-

The ape was faster, sitting next to her and grabbing her hands, placing them above her head.

"Did you enjoy it?" -he asked, to which Mae only nodded, unable to speak.- "More than when I touched you?"

Mae could have denied it perfectly with her head, but she thought of having fun since he had found her like that. After all, that's what she wanted. For him to touch her again.

"More than when you touched me." -she found her voice, speaking softly.-

The ape didn't respond. He just got on top of her, looking into her eyes.

"I don't enjoy anything. Every time I go to the bathroom, I come back worse than before. My hands are so useless that I don't reach climax. The last time I did was because of your small and soft hands around my faro, and that's killing me. And on top of that, you come and touch yourself in front of my nose."

Noa didn't stop talking, and his hands accompanied everything he said. He started undressing her, taking off her jersey and finishing with her bra. He also pulled down her pants to her ankles, the same place where he put her underwear.

"I only think of your hands touching me, and that leaves me unsatisfied because I can't touch you. My hands burn, I touched myself thinking of you, and I don't reach climax because in reality, you're not touching me."

The ape started touching her, caressing her clitoris, sensitive from her previous orgasm.

"You can touch me, and I can touch you." -Mae tried to touch him, but the ape stopped her.- "Please, Noa. I'm yours. My body is mine, but it only responds like that because of you, because it's a traitor. I can't contain it every time I have you near. Neither my father nor yours can stop this."

Mae moved her hips, bringing her wet entrance to the ape's hard faro, and he sighed.

"Mae. I-I can't. If I can't live after letting you touch me with your hands, I don't want to imagine my life after being inside you."

"Please, Noa. In body and soul, I'm yours. If you take me today, I know it will be forever, just like if it's in two months. It doesn't matter when, but it's going to happen, and it doesn't matter if today or in two months. But it will happen, and it doesn't matter if you take me or not, I'm already yours."

Noa seemed moved by those words. The ape's eyes never left the human's.

Mae felt the tip of his virility in her already wet and ready entrance.

"Noa." -she grabbed his strong shoulders, arching her back.-

"Mae, my god, Mae."

The ape's words in her ear were enough to awaken the fire inside her.

He had stopped after inserting a few centimeters, and she needed him inside her completely.

Her hips moved forward, making him penetrate her more.

"Mae, Mae."

The ape of the eagle clan, known for his singing, was singing in her ear. Or at least that's what it seemed to her. A sweet melody that she was ready to enjoy.

Noa sank completely into her, making her scream his name. The ape didn't hold back and started moving inside her.

"Very... tight." -she heard him whisper.- "Please, Mae. I'm not going to last long!"

That information almost sounded like a plea to her. He was asking her to come before him so that he could finish inside her satisfied.

"Noa, Noa."

She squeezed his shoulders, moving her hips. There was no need for him to beg, since the moment he penetrated her, her vagina had started to contract. Each time with more intensity.

"Noa!"

She screamed his name and felt that electricity that only he produced in her again. Her orgasm hit her hard.

"Ah, Mae!"

Noa didn't take long to come inside her a second after she did. Mae felt the warm liquid inside her sliding out when he pulled away.

Both enjoyed the silence while trying to catch their breath.

Mae looked for Noa's gaze, finding his eyes looking at her. She smiled widely, laughing and lying down next to him to see him better.

"Now you're mine too." -she said.-

Noa imitated her, lying down next to her to see her.

"I were already yours. Since the first moment our gazes met."

Mae felt very grateful because her feelings were reciprocated.

. END!

[simply-ivanka]

Who’s Afraid of Project 2025?

Democrats run against a think-tank paper that Trump disavows. Why?

Wall Street Journal

July 29, 2024

By The Editorial Board

Americans are learning more about Kamala Harris, as Democrats rush to anoint the Vice President’s candidacy after throwing President Biden overboard. Ms. Harris wasted no time saying she’s going to run hard against a policy paper that Donald Trump has disavowed—the supposedly nefarious agenda known as Project 2025. But who’s afraid of a think-tank white paper?

“I will do everything in my power to unite the Democratic Party—and unite our nation—to defeat Donald Trump and his extreme Project 2025 agenda,” Ms. Harris tweeted shortly after President Biden dropped out. She’s picking up this ball from Mr. Biden, and her campaign website claims that Project 2025 would “strip away our freedoms” and “abolish checks and balances.”

***

Sounds terrible, but is it? The 922-page document doesn’t lack for modesty, as a wish list of policy reforms that would touch every part of government from the Justice Department to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The project is led by the Heritage Foundation and melds the work of some 400 scholars and analysts from an eclectic mix of center-right groups. The project is also assembling a Rolodex of those who might work in a Trump Administration.

Most of the Democratic panic-mongering has focused on the project’s aim to rein in the administrative state. That includes civil service reform that would make it easier to remove some government workers, and potentially revisiting the independent status of agencies like the Federal Trade Commission.

The latter isn’t going to happen, but getting firmer presidential control over the bureaucracy would improve accountability. The federal government has become so vast that Presidents have difficulty even knowing what is going on in the executive branch. Americans don’t want to be ruled by a permanent governing class that doesn’t answer to voters.

Some items on this menu are also standard conservative fare. The document calls for an 18% corporate tax rate (now 21%), describing that levy as “the most damaging tax” in the U.S. system that falls heavily on workers. A mountain of economic literature backs that up. The blueprint suggests tying more welfare programs with work; de-regulating health insurance markets; expanding Medicare Advantage plans that seniors like; ending sugar subsidies; revving up U.S. energy production. That all sounds good to us.

Democrats are suggesting the project would gut Social Security, though in fact it bows to Mr. Trump’s preference not to touch the retirement program, which is headed for bankruptcy without reform. No project can profess to care about the rising national debt, as Heritage does, without fixing a program that was 22% of the federal budget in 2023.

At times the paper takes no position. For example: The blueprint features competing essays on trade policy. This is a tacit admission that for all the GOP’s ideological confusion on economics, many conservatives still understand that Mr. Trump’s 10% tariff is a terrible idea.

As for the politics, Mr. Trump recently said online that he knew “nothing about Project 2025. I have no idea who is behind it.” That may be true. The chance that Mr. Trump has read any of it is remote to nil, and he doesn’t want to be tied to anyone’s ideas since he prizes maximum ideological flexibility.

The document mentions abortion nearly 200 times, but Mr. Trump wants to neutralize that issue. The project’s chief sponsor, Heritage president Kevin Roberts, also gave opponents a sword when he boasted of “a second American revolution” that would be peaceful “if the left allows it to be.” This won’t help Mr. Trump with the swing voters he needs to win re-election.

By our lights the project’s cultural overtones are also too dark and the agenda gives too little spotlight to the economic freedom and strong national defense that defined the think tank’s influence on Ronald Reagan in 1980.

***

But the left’s campaign against Project 2025 is reaching absurd decibels. You’d think Mr. Trump is a political mastermind hiding the secret plans he’ll implement with an army of shock troops marching in lockstep. If his first term is any guide, and it is the best we have, Mr. Trump will govern as a make-it-up-as-he-goes tactician rather than a strategist with a coherent policy guide. He’ll dodge and weave based on the news cycle and often based on whoever talks to him last.

Not much of the Project 2025 agenda is likely to happen, even if Republicans take the House and Senate. Democrats will block legislation with a filibuster. The bureaucracy will leak with abandon and oppose even the most minor reforms to the civil service. The press will revert to full resistance mode, and Mr. Trump’s staff will trip over their own ambitions.

Democrats know this, which is why they fear Trump II less than they claim. They’re targeting Project 2025 to distract from their own failed and unpopular policies.

[olderthannetfic]

I know this isn't usually your thing because its not about fandom really but politics. I'm scared how acceptable violent language against "bad people" is right now in left spaces and I'm worried it means I'm a centrist or something. I'm queer and life is scary rn so i know why people are hurt and afraid but I don't think saying wanting someone to be murdered is ok even if you think the person is truly horrible. But maybe I'm just being fragile? I don't have a lot of experience with this.

--

Unfortunately, this is absolutely a fandom thing and I rant about it often.

No, becoming the worst part of your fascist enemies will not protect you or make your political movement successful. Fandom puritywankers are generally also US-flavor fake Lefties who know nothing about economic theory but think authoritarianism is great.

Thinking that "bad people" is a real and immutable category is inherently politically dangerous. To get shit done, you need to be able to identify acceptable compromises and groups that are compatible but different vs. ones that are too toxic to touch.

The black and white thinking of a child will not effect political change.

It has nothing to do with being a centrist.

It also has nothing to do with fragility. You may be feeling fragile, and understandably so, but I am not. Seeing wishes for violence doesn't upset me: it bores me.

If people send stupidass death threats in my notes because ~ooh~ the issue is just ~that important~, they get blocked because toddlers have no place in a reasonable discussion between adults. This should be the norm in fandom spaces.

[qqueenofhades]

Hi just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to thoughtfully respond to these anon messages. I work in dc w a fairly wonky set and i cant overstate how haunted the DC Professional Thought Havers are by the spectre of the "low propensity voter." I think these ppl (myself included LOL) thought we had everything figured out ahead of the 2016 elections and then never recovered from the way it ended up going......i feel like in all the years that followed.....the liberal bubbles.....the coastal elites.......the hillbilly elegies......the real america....the ohio diners....the pennsylvania diners.......the polls......the 2020 horserace....while part of an earnest attempt to understand What Happened, were primarily self-indulgent, self-flagellation for being "out of touch" bc of a self-diagnosed "elite" status that then turned into ANOTHER myopic view of the world, just opposite, where the "libs" are hapless and everyone else remotely to the left are primarily victims to the unstoppable supernatural forces of the Right. Then in 2020 the narrative flipped AGAIN and once again, instead of taking the opportunity to expand a worldview and having the bravery to confront their own shortcomings, the opinion havers and wonks and beltway pressers have decided to groupthink their way into writing off democracy altogether. Its BEYOND frustrating to see! Like damn volunteer at a soup kitchen or smthn instead of being obsessed w the fact that i vote lol

Yes, and there are several reasons for that. First, despite all the factors that contributed to Trump's shock win in 2016 (anti-Clintonism, white backlash to Obama, general low voter enthusiasm, Russian disinformation, etc) we should never forget that until James Comey decided to announce 10 days before the election that he was reopening the EEEEEEEMAILS case, even though we all knew there was nothing there, she was leading fairly comfortably in the polls. And while we will never know how the 2016 election would have gone without that, which imho was one of the most unforgivable acts of blatant sabotage by a public official in American history, it's also true that we saw her poll averages start sliding almost in real time, as people who hadn't really been keen on voting for her anyway decided firmly not to and Trump was able to scrape out 16,000 votes across PA, MI, and WI to take the Electoral College. Which... we all remember how we felt that night, right? (Or in my case, early morning, since I was overseas?) We don't, we really, really don't want to feel that way again. Just saying.

As such, the media (which had already beat up Clinton nonstop during the BUT HER EEEEEMAILS saga) drastically overcorrected and as you say, began writing endless angsty handwringing pieces about Trump Voters in Rural Ohio Diners and giving endless sympathetic airtime to how "economically left behind" they felt, regardless of the fact that open racism, especially Obama backlash, was and remains the principal animating feature of Republican politics (since their only economic platform is that which makes very rich people even richer and Democratic economic policies are the only ones actually targeted at helping ordinary people). The hangover was so strong that even when Democrats had a massive 2018 midterm result and flipped the House blue for the first time since the post-ACA backlash lost it in 2010, the Conventional Wisdom was now beyond any doubt that Democrats were doomed for a generation or something, and not that Trump had squeaked out a fluky win (while losing the popular vote) due to endless Russian/Comey/third party-etc interference and wasn't actually that powerful. Even in 2020 when Biden was leading fairly steadily and things were going to hell with Covid, etc. etc. TRUMP IS UNSTOPPABLE, TRUMP IS GOING TO WIN.

(And now. Like. I know Trump thinks Trump won in 2020, as do a large majority of his cultists, but that doesn't mean he did.)

Even after that, when Roe went down in 2022, that made no difference to the RED WAVE COMING!!! narrative, and the amount of smug white male pundits insisting that abortion just wasn't very important and people weren't going to base their entire vote on it reached truly disgusting levels. We're now seeing the same thing with the constant "people won't vote for democracy and/or abortion rights" blast, when as you say, this narrative has just been completely made the fuck up by a lot of groupthinking DC media who are determined that this time, Trump really is going to win and then they get to be principled chroniclers in opposition or something. Not to mention, the basic principle of "democracy and abortion rights are good" do in fact win by thumping margins every time they're on the ballot, including in deep red states. But there is literally not a single piece of empirical evidence despite the massive amounts of it supporting the truth (i.e. that Democrats are doing historically well in competitive elections since 2018 and there's not really a major reason to think this will change in 2024) that will get the media to change the "Democrats in disarray and Biden Iz Doomed" horserace BS they so love. They don't like Biden because he's boring and competent and just does the job without being insane, because it's totally a great idea to treat American government like a reality show! (Recall the infamous comment by the CBS CEO who literally said that Trump was bad for America but great for CBS, because he pulled in high ratings and therefore lots of money and visibility for CBS. We live in the worst timeline.)

As such, the mainstream media has a vendetta against Biden, is determined that this time Trump is super definitely going to win and everyone will see how genius they are, and not-so-secretly wants Trump back because a) he's good for money and ratings, and b) because the media conglomerations are owned by oligarchs who have a vested interest in making sure that Democrats and their policies never get too popular. Notice how the once self-proclaimed centrist independent Elon Musk has turned into a rabidly alt-right fanboy ever since the Democrats really got serious about taxing billionaires as a key part of their platform. Likewise, insisting that Biden Iz Doomed makes Democrats nervous (and thus more likely to tune in) and Republicans gleeful (and thus more likely to tune in), so there's literally no incentive for the media to even try to report things accurately. You could create a very different narrative of the 2024 election if you just remotely bothered to write about things that have actually happened as they have actually taken place, rather than bending over backward to insist that Biden being four years older than Trump is a worse crime than 91 felony indictments, 2 impeachments, 1 insurrection, 450 million dollars and counting in punitive jury verdicts, more major criminal trials coming down the pipe, and just demonstrably being the worst human being alive in so many ways. I mean. Wow.

The good news, as I said in my other post, is that when people actually vote, these utter bullshit narratives get routinely blown out of the water, and that's a good thing. Because it turns out that unlike Super Smart Beltway Pundits' Super Smart Predictions, the average American does actually like democracy and freedom for women to make their own personal healthcare decisions, and they vote accordingly. So while yes, it's being made harrowingly much harder than it needs to be because of how much the media simply refuses to report that basic fact, and there is no amount of evidence that will convince them otherwise, at least we're trending in the right direction and, if we all pull our weight, can do it one more time. I realized the other day that I hadn't heard a fucking peep about Ron DeSantis in the last two months, and oh, how glorious it was. I yearn beyond words for the day (God willing, soon) when the same is true of Trump as well.

[max1461]

I think there are three large classes of socialist concern, which are not reducible to each other and which require different types of solutions. I would describe them as follows:

Distributional concerns — Markets tend towards inequality, and thus even in times of abundance fail to allocate resources to people who need them.

Concerns over autonomy — Private control of resources, especially when it is highly concentrated, comes at the cost of the autonomy of those who don't control the resources. As a significant special case of this, private control of the means of production deprives workers of autonomy over their own work, which constitutes most of their waking lives. Concentration of property in the hands of the few leaves most people with no choice but to sell their labor, turning them into workers deprived of autonomy in the above sense.

Humanistic concerns — Markets optimize for specific outcomes and, furthermore, the desirable properties of market economies are predicated on the existence of firms which optimize for profit. In both cases these optimization procedures are premature; they do not factor in the full human condition and thus come at the cost of many things which people find desirable.

In my view, a successful socialist program must at least attempt to address all three of these concerns. Often when debating other socialists, I feel that they err by focusing on some of these concerns to the exclusion of the others.

I have listed these concerns in order of how difficult I believe them to be to solve. Concern (1) can, in fact, be solved relatively easily even within a liberal economic system, by implementing massive redistributive taxes that equalize wealth. I want to stress that this proposal is still radical by the standards of any nation on earth today, but a solution is easy to imagine. And all these problems are interrelated; solving (1), for instance, would go a long way towards remedying (2).

Concern (2) can also, I think, be solved or at least greatly mitigated under a market framework, though not a classical liberal one. Replacing private firms wholesale with worker co-ops would go along way towards addressing (2), and in combination with the above solution for (1) provides I think the easiest to conceptualize vision of what a workable socialist (socialist enough) economy might look like.

Concern (3) is by far the hardest to address—it is in essence just the alignment problem as applied to economic systems. Suffice it to say, the problem remains open.

A common theme I see in debates between certain (usually more liberal-leaning) practically-minded socialists and certain (usually more radical) utopian-minded socialists is that the practical socialist will propose some solution that aims to address (1) and (2), and the more utopian-minded socialist will respond with vague and often not particularly coherent accusations of insufficient radicalism. The practical socialist will often then reply by dismissing the utopian's criticisms as nothing but hot air, as unserious radical posturing. But I think this represents an unfortunate misunderstanding. That utopian is often pointing at something real, even if it is articulated in a way that offends more pragmatic sensibilities. Concern (3) touches on every part of human life, I think it's fair to say, and though the habit of incoherently blaming everything that goes wrong on capitalism is not that useful, it doesn't point at nothing.

The alignment problem is not solved in the general case, but there are things we can change about a system to try and make it more aligned with specific, known goals. So the job of a good socialist (or really, anyone interested in any kind of political reform) should then be to listen to the ways in which people are dissatisfied with their lives, even when articulated poorly, and try to accrue an understanding of the most recurrent and significant ways in which the present system fails to satisfy people. Then you can look for specific tweaks that will more readily accommodate the things people in fact seem to want. But crucially, this task in empirical—you cannot come upon the most desirable tweaks rationally. It's also empirical in a way that is difficult to approach with any kind of scientific rigor. You have to listen to people, and try to understand them on their own terms. You have to try to understand where people are coming from even if they phrase things in a way that you very much dislike, a way that irritates you or makes you feel threatened.

As I've said before, "listen to marginalized voices" is oft-misused, but not actually incorrect as a description of the practical obligations of anyone who wants to consider themself a leftist.

[zenaidamacrouras1]

i think pre-war!bucky would also have a steve-clinginess anxiety scale, if he didn't have to constantly be aware of steve's prickliness. a modern pre-serum!steve would be significantly less prickly about everything, as he would encounter significantly less overt eugenics. more ability to be openly queer and having more ability to define his own masculinity would help too

post-serum doesn't have to be so guarded or guard his independence, and he's not constantly on the verge of being labelled queer, so he would have more leeway with initiating physical contant. and the buckies you write with a post-serum steve don't have anxiety disorders, lol. so i believe they would be a cuddly couple, and bucky's anxiety wouldn't express itself so clearly in steve-clinging

Hi friend! 👋 Interesting! You know what, I actually read pre-war Canon Steve as less prickly than many fans seem to.

I don't mind him being characterized as prickly and sometimes I absolutely adore it, but I don't necessarily see it as accurate in my little brain.

In CATFA we are seeing him on one of the worst weeks of his life. His best friend and maybe only friend and likely sole source of economic stability is about to go get maybe killed in war. So. Woof. I think he is absolutely at his worst. I can imagine him actually being pretty cuddly on a regular sort of day before Bucky got drafted.

Steve is not prickly, per se, post serum. He's tough. He's sarcastic. He doesn't like to be underestimated, but he's usually correct when he assumes people are underestimating him. He frequently forgets to value his own life. He's also very, very kind and very polite to people who aren't unmitigated dicks. I feel like these character traits would be consistent pre/post serum.

And the other thing we forget is that men used to be allowed to hug and even kiss tenderly (esp in some cultures). In Lord of the Rings which was written around WWII the men were allowed to be affectionate in a way that people today joke "ended toxic masculinity" but it's decades old. The toxic masculinity that the affection and devotion in LOTR "ended" didn't precisely exist when the LOTR was written.

Which is not to say things weren't bad. Just that men were allowed to be more affectionate with each other and have it be read as platonic (in part because women were seen as less then men).(Look I'm not an actual historian so this probably is not 100% accurate but I do touch on some of these themes in my Shakespeare fic -- it talks about historic concepts of marriage and same-sex affection that I researched extensively)

That being said, yes agreed, Steve would have had many awful pressures due to eugenics and anti-queer bias, but my thought is, he might have been comfortable cuddling up to Bucky platonically or otherwise...

Anyway, re my own writing, my earlier stuff has less consistent characterization. Don't trust anything I said back then. Just kidding. Mostly :)

Finally, in summary, hell yes cuddly couple. I'm all in on the Stucky cuddling head canon.

[blackhairedjjun]

flowers of every color | 8. sweet peas

overall summary: when your father is assigned as the new head gardener to the royal family, you are also tasked with helping him maintain the castle's many gardens and extensive floral arrangements. by chance you find yourself crossing paths with the "ice-cold" crown prince, choi yeonjun... who turns out to be not as ice-cold as everyone says he is.

chapter summary: yeonjun's engagement starts to speed up. despite the end of your friendship with him, you somehow make amends with the other two princes.

word count: 2.1k

warnings: none? less angst than the previous 2 chapters but still some of it

author's notes included at the end!

prev | masterlist | next

yeonjun hates how easy it is for him to act indifferent these days.

his tea has gone cold and queen hwayoung is blabbering away about some recent economic development in her kingdom, yet her words simply go in one ear and come out the other. her daughter, princess ajin, sits stiffly across him, the lemon tart on her plate barely touched. she’s hardly said a word all afternoon, offering only a few polite words when spoken to, and when she looks at yeonjun her face is a mask. these teatime sessions are supposed to be a way for him to get to know her, yet she remains as impenetrable as ever.

in response he offers little more than standard courtesy. if the princess is only interested in him as a political tool, then why even bother to open himself up to her?

“what do you think of the tarts, your majesty?” he says. “our kitchen makes fine pastries.”

“they’re delicious.” princess ajin’s voice doesn’t even change in tone.

queen hwayoung nods. “and what say you on the tea we brought? our farmers grow the finest tea leaves served in royal courts and noble houses all over. i like to think that whenever we serve our tea to distinguished guests such as yourself, you share in the privilege of being part of our heritage.”

“that’s... a lot of meaning to place on tea.”

the queen frowns. “it’s a meaning that brings us might. besides, it’s not any different from placing silly meanings in, say, flowers.”

yeonjun presses his lips together. he would argue that it isn’t silly, and in fact the meanings that placed on flowers have brought people together 一 he would know firsthand. but he thinks of you, of the vase sitting empty in his room for weeks, and of the striped carnations you ultimately filled it with as a final message, and he realizes that flowers are just as capable of separating people as they are of binding them.

“i guess you’re right, your majesty. and the tea is delicious.”

“and this was a good tea break,” princess ajin adds, as if reading from an invisible cue.

yeonjun nods. he glances at the half-eaten tart on his own plate and remembers the key lime pie he asked beomgyu to deliver to you. he realizes that he never found out if you liked it, or if it even reached you in the first place. tea with you was always more lively, even if you did nothing more than sit next to him, your side nestled against his, as you listen to him chatter about his day. an ache tugs at his heart at the memory.

perhaps those days with you were always meant to come to an end. they certainly would if he marries princess ajin, and they would too if he were married off to any other royal or aristocratic figure. perhaps you did him a small mercy by ending things quickly on your terms to save him from the heartache of being forced apart.

but even if it were a mercy, it certainly doesn’t feel like one.

queen hwayoung clears her throat and yeonjun is shaken out of his thoughts. “things are going smoothly, aren’t they? i haven’t heard any objections from you or my daughter, after all.” she is smiling but her eyes are narrowed. “i take this as a positive development. perhaps it is time to hasten preparations for a wedding?”

yeonjun’s eyes widen. he glances at princess ajin and her expression remains exactly the same.

“i don’t think being hasty is such a good idea, your majesty一”

the queen sighs. “i am not being too hasty, i believe. i am simply reading the signs of an advantageous marriage.” she glances down at her daughter. “don’t you think so, my dear?”

the princess nods and smiles. yeonjun can’t tell if it’s genuine or not.

“and your majesty, do remind me to place the rest of the house of choi on the guest list, yes? i hear that their delegates are leaving soon. i do not want them to miss out on a momentous occasion.”

一

while tending to the marigolds at the front entrance one day, you notice two carts parked to the side partially filled with suitcases. at first you don’t think much of it 一 guests come and go to the castle all the time 一 but when you pass them by on your way to the greenhouse, you notice that some of the suitcases in both carts are embossed with the house of choi insignia. your interest is piqued. when you walk up to the suitcases for a closer look, you see that the crests are not identical to the ones found around the castle; rather, they look like the alternate versions that soobin and beomgyu have on their coats.

ah, you realize. the members of the other branches are heading back home soon.

for the past few days you’ve felt numb, keeping to yourself and sticking to your daily tasks, but the sight of the crests causes a bit of sadness to hang over you. for the first time in weeks you think back on your time with the three princes. in your mind you still hear beomgyu’s raucuous laughter after scoring a point against soobin at football, or the light in soobin’s eyes as he rambles about his favorite adventure novels. you remember how kindly they treated you and how readily they welcomed you as one of their own friends.

you didn’t mean to push them away, but since they were always around yeonjun, the end of your friendship with him inadvertently meant the end of your friendship with them too. the guilt creeps at you as you head back to the greenhouse, your heart now heavy.

as the days pass, you see more and more signs of the other branches’ impending departure. you deliver some more herbs to the kitchen and spot the menu taped to one of the walls, recognizing some of the dishes as specialties from the central and eastern regions. you see more and more of the branches’ guest advisors roaming the hallways, idly chatting and laughing with court officials, catching up with old friends one last time. when you pass by the carriages again, you see even more luggage piled up.

you consider saying hello to soobin and beomgyu one last time and apologizing them for getting them into the mess that you made. you don’t want their last memories of you to be bittersweet, after all. yet when you imagine what the encounter might be like, you freeze; you don’t know if they will forgive you or accept your farewell. in the greenhouse you contemplate preparing two pots of sweet peas for them, flowers of goodbye to send them off and wish them well, and you get as far as setting aside two earthen pots and filling them with soil. but when the time comes to actually fill them with blooms, you hesitate.

despite your hesitation, you run into them anyway.

one afternoon, as you head back to the greenhouse, you pass by the open meadows and hear the familiar shouts of a badminton game in progress. you stop in your tracks to watch beomgyu pick up the shuttlecock and lob it at soobin, and for a while you smile to yourself as they hit it back and forth, back and forth, running and teasing each other the whole time. beomgyu tries his best to distract or startle soobin by making loud noises whenever the shuttlecock flies his way, yet soobin manages to keep his focus... until he misjudges his swing and the shuttlecock ends up bouncing off his nose.

you laugh at the sight and the game comes to a halt.

the shuttlecock is forgotten on the grass as both boys turn to you. soobin looks at you with narrowed eyes, as if watching a suspicious stranger instead of an old friend, and you want to crumple into yourself at his gaze. you remember the conversation you had with him: it’s been a really long time since yeonjun opened himself up to someone and it’s doing him good, so thanks for being there for him. 

you turn instead to beomgyu, whose gaze is more neutral but tinged with hesitation. still, the younger choi trudges through the meadow towards you, ignoring soobin’s look of scrutiny. he wrings his hands for a bit while saying nothing, but manages to pull himself together and look you in the eye.

“so, uh... we haven’t heard from you in a while,” he says.

again you feel like crumpling into yourself.

“yeah... i know.” you shift your weight from one foot to the other. “i’m really sor一”

“do you want to play with us?”

you blink. the last thing you expected was an invitation to join them, not after avoiding them and especially not after what you did to yeonjun. soobin seems to share your sentiment, his mouth agape as he shoots beomgyu a confused stare. but beomgyu glances back at him and nods, instantly communicating something; when soobin turns back to you, he looks a little less suspicious and gives you a nod too.

beomgyu turns to you again with a polite smile. “so, how about it?”

then it clicks in your head: this is a tentative truce. they want to test the waters with you, see if you can be trusted again, but first beomgyu needs everyone to calm down and put down their walls. when you realize this you stop shifting your weight as the energy in you changes. you’re being given a second chance, and you need to seize it.

“sure, i’ll join you,” you say.

you jog over to them and beomgyu hands you a spare racquet. soobin sits the game out 一 you can tell that he still feels uneasy about you, and you don’t blame him. you take your position as beomgyu picks up the shuttlecock and prepares to serve.

the game begins.

the first few points are short and uneventful, going back and forth between you and beomgyu without flair. but at 3-3, you somehow end up in a long rally — you try to smash, he nearly dives to send it back, you scramble to hit, he screams as he miraculously picks it up, you try to smash again, he screams even louder and lobs the shot, you send it back just in time, but it’s too high and he smashes it down on your side with an almighty yell.

“HAH! I’M WINNING!” he shouts as he waves his racquet above his head like a flag. you’re out of breath from the rally but you still find it in you to cheer.

even soobin is laughing and clapping. “you finally have a worthy opponent.”

“yeah! i never have long rallies with you, hyung!”

the rest of the game is just as exciting. you and beomgyu struggle for each point, chasing after the shuttlecock and screaming with each hit, and soobin gets on his feet to serve as referee. that turns out to be a good thing, because beomgyu starts to challenge all of your clean smashes as out of bounds just to mess with your head. but you don’t mind either way; you’re breathless and smiling and truly happy and it feels like old times all over again.

the two of you are in the middle of another long rally before beomgyu interrupts the point. “hyung! do you want to join us? yeonjun hyung!”

you turn around and see yeonjun for the first time since your argument. you’re far enough from him that you can see his whole posture and the way his shoulders are noticeably slumped. whatever lightness you felt starts to disappear as your chest tightens and the guilt floods back in.

but oh, something good still blooms in you at the sight of him.

he turns in your direction with an empty stare. “i can’t. i’m busy.”

with that, he marches off.

you open your mouth to call for him but all you do is choke back a sob. your racquet falls from your hand and, in a daze, you stare at the spot where yeonjun stood. you barely register beomgyu jogging over to you and talking.

“let’s stop the game for now, okay?”

you nod, not even moving to face him.

“i’ll go after hyung,” you hear soobin say as he starts to walk out of the meadow. he glances at beomgyu, then at you: “you really need to work things out.”

notes:

this chapter is a bit shorter than the previous ones, and actually this + chapter 9 were originally supposed to be one chapter. but since the second half was getting long i decided to make it into its own chapter instead.

at this point i've pretty much drafted the rest of the story, so the plan for the rest of the fic is this: there will be two more regular chapters, followed by the two alternate endings. since the story is ending soon i'm closing the taglist on wednesday, may 31, 12am utc+8. if you want to be added please send me an ask before then!

taglist (closes may 31 12am utc+8) @seosalad @lilplilplilp @yeonboy @pyuae @hyuneyeon @strawbrinkofdeath @yushiu @mazeinthemoon @banggyu0308 @shytubatu @kyaneosprincess @agustdiv1ne @whippedforbeomgyu @justineasian @skywithf1 @wrongbathroom

[centrally-unplanned]

Do you think there's something the Democrats could've done better to respond to the whole "vibecession" narrative?

Not directly too much. Like I can envision some radically different world where the education system somehow magically teaches people to value BLS reports and aggregate financial indicators and grok "loss aversion bias" over their instincts and their facebook feed? But that obviously isn't happening today, and I don't even think that is a fair point to make. People have told you, loud and clear, that they prefer unemployment to inflation. This makes sense, actually - during a recession the large majority of people don't lose their jobs. The large increase in wages for the bottom ~20% of Americans in the economic boom has meant large increases in the costs of services for wealthier Americans, and those wealthier Americans are the majority. People aren't solely self-interested when voting, not at all, but they absolutely partially are. I don't think in practice things could have been much better given realistic constraints, but I understand the ideal world of an economic recovery with no inflation that they wanted. Dems didn't deliver that, so they got punished.

That doesn't mean Dems could have done nothing ofc. One way is, of course, to just do better policy! I give them a C+/B- overall on the post-pandemic economic stuff, I have realistic expectations, but I could generate a gigantic list of policies that hurt the US economic that Dems either actively embraced or at least refused to touch. And additionally, there is the branding of it. I think it was good policy because I don't think temporary sub-10% inflation is that big of a deal, but in hindsight everyone should be really sus of the politics of having the signature Biden Administration policy agenda be about global warming. Voters don't care about climate change compared to the big stuff, and it plays into exactly that "out of touch elites" narrative. I don't think it hurt them very much, they did a decent job pairing it and branding it with more populist stuff? But you can see a world where they passed some big bill actually deserving of the name Inflation Reduction Act, and being able to say "we tried" even if it didn't work. I don't think anything short of actually making inflation lower would have helped this time around, but it certainly wouldn't have hurt.

The other way is to of course just run with it as part of an outsider's campaign. Hold a primary, the unpopular Biden loses, and the Dem Ticket explicitly embraces "the Biden Era mismanaged the economy, we will right the ship" as its agenda. Why this didn't happen and how effective if it could have been has been talked to death in other posts though, so I will leave it for now.

[insanescriptist]

Im so scared because of this election and what it means for my loved ones and I.

If you're a global nonnie,

I'm sorry; you believed in the intelligence and humanity of the average American voter and were denied both.

Obviously Trump being elected is going to embolden the worst politics; either to use or abuse or both, the world and it's peoples. Not just in the current warring areas, but all over the world.

And remember, Trump is currently 78; he could easily die of natural causes within the next four years. Without Trump's star power, a lot of that momentum will die fast.

If you're in the US nonnie,

If you live in a Blue state, your state's likely to stay Blue, with all that being a Blue state entails

If you live in a Red state, your state is likely to stay Red, with all that being a Red state entails

If you live in a Purple state, it's likely going to swing one way or another and I wish you the best in surviving the politics and the political ads

Further US specifics under the cut

Like I'll be real and say I'm disappointed my state's not more purple, which is the best color anyway (side effect of living in the South; it's very Red Republican politics) but it is what it is; we just gotta live with it or deal with it so... most posts I've seen going around have focused on the importance of letting yourself grieve, choosing an issue to focus on and avoiding burnout. I think I'll focus on awareness somewhat. Just things to watch out for. Because there's going to be all sorts of obnoxious crowing and cawing about everything. I'll touch on things and if I had the time and energy, I'd link to various stories and sites but most of what I'll say here is easy enough to verify in broad strokes with a couple of internet searches.

If you're worried about the economy... yeah that's a valid worry and probably not the way you're thinking. You're thinking another trade war (Mexico would love it if there is btw, they benefited off of the last one and the Farmers who had soy in their fields as part of that rotation lost so much money) which would be ow for the US again, but mostly survivable as trade wars only focus either a trade good or trade partnership. The lesser issue but more concerning, Trump will slash anything he wants (regulations mostly) to ensure an economic boon because that's what people want and will notice by year 2 and 3 of his second term. What they'll celebrate. That and cheap gas. What they won't notice for a couple years is the further loosening of food regs (see all the recent food recalls and outbreaks) and what people won't notice for decades is the infrastructure issues (building regs for housing and ofc infrastructure in general.) There's also the various other safety regs and requirements built into the laws, no matter how shitty it is ie workman's comp. Regs are built in blood but business don't care if their money is bloody. But yeah, these reg slashes are going to crop up with after effects for absolute decades afterwards. Don't believe me? You should watch more housing renovation programs; there's various types of plumbing and electrical regulations that can absolutely date your house. And yes, the housing insurance companies can spot them and also not tell you about them, but certainly charge you for the increased risk. That's just for the housing regs btw. Industrials regs concern entire industries, like how much carbon your car can emit to be considered eco-friendly to what sort of pipes can be laid out where. No one wants to be the next Flint, Michigan but it could easily happen and probably with something else. There's buildings made less than 50 years ago that are made with materials considered unsafe by standards now. There's also banking shit to consider with businesses and housing. The oodles of various office and retail space unused which um. The banks care a lot about unused office space that can't even be refit into human housing. Empty retail space can eventually be filled with another business. Empty offices less so now that more businesses are less tied to the office as a place. (Reduces other business' overhead.) Banks hate having empty unprofitable buildings in their portfolio, but at least the interest rates are back to "normal" percentages. Like I won't get into the the money generation/shuffle game that's going on with the US debt, other than 2.4% is sustainable for political purposes and not humanitarian purposes, because boy would it be nice to slash the national debt. Really make the dollar worth something that way. Sure, I'll take getting paid more, but I'd sure like to be able to also buy more with my pay. Because foodstuff is still going high because of various supply issues due to climate issues, the newest banana plague, in addition to many, many recalls. Like does no one remember the arson going around various meat farms several years ago? The various poultry farms ended because of avian flu? Long story short, the food prices are still so high because supply is pretty fucked up. Stores have been jumping through so many hoops to get supplied, that the logistics people are probably Olympic level rhythm dancers by now. Which is an additional complication to the whole ongoing recall issues whenever there's a bad batch of anything. They're a bit too busy ensuring supply to always have all the documentation in order. Which obviously, recalls work best when stores know which products to pull. More economic news though, Trump is going to be so good for businesses. And so bad for the people.

If you're worried about your medical health, that's also a valid worry. Especially with his comments on various known vaccines. Like the standard ones we've had for ages. Might wanna get those touched up. Medical red tape is annoying to wade through at the best of times but he's not in office yet, so plan accordingly. Make the most use of your health benefits this year and next year (they're already set for the year), since the year after will be once he's in office and things will obviously shift to some degree with whatever health insurance you've got, if any. A little medical debt in prevention is more than worth the expense of cure later. Get the cavities seen to. Get that pap smear. Refresh your vaccinations. Do your tests, get your bloodwork ran and go through it bit by bit. Take your damn vitamins. (And your meds.) Because again, those regulations? Those are going to get more loosey-goosey. In some things. More tight on some things than others. It's going to vary by state politics. Like my state for example does allow for birth control but not for abortion. Would I like abortion to be an option, yes, because my state is terrible about supporting families after the birth of a child beyond WIC and SNAP benefits. Daycare waiting lists can be over a year and maternity/paternity leave is something of a joke depending on what/who you work for. About the only solid boon I can think of would be Trump's loosening of the health regs, that might entice some nurses back to nursing, easing that lack of human resources in the health care system. As a red state, there were so so so many nurses I've talked to that quit/retired rather than take a booster shot for Covid or even the original Covid shot. Which is a whole different story, but not for here.

If you're worried about your public safety because you're part of a vulnerable/minority population? Yeah, be concerned. Trump's political leanings and what he says emboldens all kinds of impulses in the worst people. So they might actually go through with impulses they wouldn't otherwise act on. The KKK might try to recruit again. Which I wish was a joke, but they actually did try to have a public, local to Izzy, meet during Trump's previous term; they got scared off by the locals. So general advice Look at travel recommendations/warnings when going through parts of the US. Plan trips carefully. Consider moving to friendlier places if able, take precautions if unable or unwilling. Keep to a buddy system. Stay with friends in public. Make your plans for if the worst happens so you don't anxiety spiral. Know who to crash with in an emergency How to get copies of your important documents if they're all ash or being held by another party etc. I know no one really does this nowadays but know your emergency contact's phone number!!! Still very important information. Your phone can be dead, lost, stolen or confiscated and along with all the data on it and with it. (Those phone cases with the wallet attachment? How delightful, a lost phone that has a wallet attached, especially one with a photo ID of any kind is a golden goose for anyone looking to do a little identity theft. Because in order to call to put cancels/holds on all your cards, you've gotta have a phone.) Also as a reminder, your biggest and best shield is your confidence; the moment you act like prey, you'll be treated as such by those looking for targets. Do your murder strut and your main problem will be people asking you for directions and grannies trying to get you to go to church.

[awakenedsalamander]

would you be willing to speak moron the Technocracy? you have very interesting takes on it and I would like to know more

Happily!

So to me the Technocracy (in its 20th and 21 century incarnations, anyway, the early Technocracy/Order of Reason is different in some significant respects) represents a view of the world that is divorced from anything other than data and hard facts. This viewpoint is not exclusive to scientism, the paradigm I discussed in my recent post on the Technocracy, and is in fact an arguable core of pragmatism itself— there are times when it is essential to put aside ideals, emotions, and speculation and work only with what you can tangibly interact with. Sometimes, you have to put aside how the world should or could be, and work only with what it provably, unquestionably is.

But if you’ve ever discussed politics with someone who keeps insisting “well, that’s just how the world is,” rather than engaging with new ways of thinking or unconventional ideals, you’ll probably have realized that this way of looking at things can be profoundly limiting.

(Incidentally, this is why I think there’s the tendency to align most Technocrats with Stasis/The Weaver— the paradigm of technology itself can be Dynamic, Entropic, and Questing in a lot of cases, but the way the Technocracy uses it is broadly static, I think.)

Let’s use an example here, and talk about climate change. There’s a tendency to view the people most effectively driving climate change— the executives who profit off it, the lobbyists and politicians who sustain it, the demagogues and conspiracists who argue against its reality— as malevolent. They know what they’re doing, they know how it hurts the world and the people who inhabit, and they’re fine with it. Maybe some of them even enjoy it. This is basically the tack Werewolf: The Apocalypse takes with Pentex, for instance.

And that view is, to a larger extent than I think is remotely comfortable, true. Reckoning with the truth in that is part of what makes Werewolf fun, and it’s also one of the drivers on Mage’s own Nephandi.

But, I think it’s also true that most of the people responsible for ecological collapse don’t see themselves as doing anything wrong, and are instead able to just elide the details of the morality and ramifications of their industry/system/ambition and focus purely on the benefit. As said earlier, that is sometimes necessary— in an immediate crisis it can even be a godsend— but in the long-term and on a wider scale it can be quite damaging.

See, if you focus only on quantifiable data, there’s a way to look at climate change as kind of a trade-off you make for important numbers to go up. Industrialization is, economically speaking, incredibly beneficial, the advancement of technology improves not only wealth, but also security, communication, and even quality of life, and from the point of view of certain fields (at least as they currently exist) like agriculture, commercial shipping, energy production, and so on, the policies that really combat the bad effects of climate change would be disastrous! Can’t we afford a few more degrees Celsius for all that?

And if you want to get really dark, there’s the fact that wealthy countries and their oligarchs are going to be the least affected by natural disasters, resource conflicts, and pandemics. It won’t be easy, sure, but nothing ever is, and from a realpolitik standpoint, if other nations (which are potential threats after all) suffer those bad effects more than you do, then maybe weathering the storm is tactically viable…

So all in all, don’t pump the brakes, and certainly don’t reinvent the wheel here! We’ve got a good thing going, and it could be chaos to stop it! Hell, with all the benefits we’re getting, we might even invent some gadget or technique to solve the worst of it.

But of course, this misses so much. In the same way that topics I wanted to touch on, like algorithmic culture and automation, may have valuable benefits from certain points of view, you have to look at the whole picture. With climate change, you already see mass extinctions, and no amount of restorative cloning is going to reverse the ecological damage there. We’re going to see an increase in displacement and homelessness by disasters and the need for people to relocate from dangerous areas, which will ruin lives, if not end them. To say nothing of the inhumanity of allowing suffering on this scale when something can be done about it, right now!

But how do you prove that “ecological damage,” “ruined lives,” and “inhumanity” are worse than the loss of trillions+ of dollars which we’d have to spend to avoid them? It’s apples to oranges— no, it’s the abstract to the concrete. If someone only wants to think about the numbers, then there’s at least a debate. There’s cost benefit analysis and logistic comparison— but not action.

Now, I am simplifying significantly here. There are many reasons that climate change and other societal crises aren’t addressed beyond scientism, or political inertia, or even just greed and selfishness. To name a few, we also struggle against ignorance, against fear, against exhaustion, against bigotry, against the unknown. It’s not so simple. One of the problems with the worldview I’m attacking is its tendency to simplify things by smoothing over the issues, so I don’t want to do that.

But I do think that the biggest issues in our society can’t be tackled with cold math and a focus on what nets the best cost-to-benefit ratio. I think in a lot of cases, that kind of thinking— which, to bring it back to the point, is the kind of thinking the Technocracy embodies— is what got us these issues in the first place.

God, was this too serious for a World of Darkness discussion?

Anyway, thanks for the question! I appreciate the chance to analyze the topic.

[wanderersrest]

Some Idle Musings on Patlabor

I've talked about Patlabor twice in some capacity, so I figured why not go for the hat trick, no? (EDIT: The hat trick was ruined because I got tilted by a certain bad take involving Gundam: Iron-Blooded Orphans)

Patlabor is probably one of my favorite anime series of all time, especially when it comes to mecha anime. Granted, a big part of that is due to me recently coming into ownership of pretty much the entire series on blu-ray, but still. And seeing as how the second post on here was about how people should check it out (among other mecha shows), I figured I'd dive a little bit deeper into at least Patlabor. Who knows, I might touch on all of the other series at some point. I'll definitely cover G Gundam at some point, that much is assured.

Anyways. Patlabor. This isn't going to be a super deep dive, but there are three things I want to highlight with this series that I really like.

The World is Carefully Crafted to Justify Its Giant Robots

A common point of praise for Patlabor is due to how the worldbuilding is set up to accommodate the giant robots. A quick synopsis of Patlabor: giant robots known as Labors were created to help with construction projects. Following the creation of Labors came Labor-related created crimes. To combat these crimes, a special type of Labor was created to stop these types of criminal activity: the Patrol Labor, or Patlabor for short.

And it's not just there that the series fleshes out the Labors. The titular Patlabors (specifically the Model 98-AV Ingrams employed by the main characters) require a whole team outside of the pilots who operate the Labors, including spotters, transport platform operators, and mechanics. The television series also makes it a point of highlighting that the important part of the Labor is not the Labor itself, but the pilot data stored in the machine's computer. The world is so thought out, that the television series even touches on Labor insurance (yes really, and it's probably one of my favorite episodes of the TV series, maybe out of every anime series I've ever watched). This is, if I understand things correctly, why a lot of people love the OVA timeline (which consists of the Early Days OVA as well as the movies).

Great Characters Part 1: Noa Izumi

If the OVA timeline has more of a focus on the worldbuilding and the politics at hand, then the TV timeline (consisting of the TV anime and the New Files OVA) hones in on the character interactions. It's a real shame too, because the main cast are a pretty likeable group. Our main character in particular, Ingram Unit 1 Pilot Noa Izumi, is a delight to watch in pretty much every scene she's in, especially in the TV series. To it's credit, the OVA timeline does keep a lot of the appeal behind the characters. If anything, I'd argue that the change in tone of the OVA timeline is both natural and an extension of the pessimism following the bursting of the Japanese Economic Bubble.

But back to Noa, part of what I like about her as a character is her resilience. There are moments throughout the various entries in the franchise where she gets knocked down, but due to the nature of her work, she gets back up to finish the job. That kind of attitude helps to round out her more usual cheery and kind of naive attitude to most things. Also, she's very hot-blooded. Which is great for any mecha series, regardless of the style of mecha show you're watching. Speaking of hot blood, I think I'd be remiss to not mention my other favorite character in the series (that's not Division 2 chief Kichii Gotoh, because that's cheating)...

Great Characters 2: Isao Ota

I think the YouTuber Argonbolt described Ingram Unit 2 pilot Isao Ota best: "...he's 50% gun nut, 50% [ego]." It's almost impossible for me to talk about how great Noa is as a character without bringing up Ota. I could just say that he works great as a foil to Noa, but I think I'd be selling our red-blooded gun nut short. Part of what makes Ota such a great character to me is the fact that, whereas a lot of Noa's growth pertains to her as a person, Ota's growth is essentially tied to how he handles his Labor.

This is because Ota is a hothead.

No, seriously. Ota's hotheadedness is a large part of what makes him such a great character, and that's just going off of the sheer entertainment value of it all. It also helps that Ota being an American-styled cowboy cop (even moreso than the American Kanuka Clancy, and she's already a bit of a cowboy cop) oftentimes has consequences. Heck, a lot of Division 2's notoriety stems largely from Ota's hotheadedness. But Ota's hotheadedness often hides aspects that betray the manly image he's crafted throughout the series. It's little things like how he frets over Noa like an older brother when she runs off on her own to chase down a bank robber, or the change in his demeanor when Kanuka and her replacement, Takeo Kumagami, start getting into an argument with each other. This depth of character is better explored in the episodes that focus squarely on Ota, with my favorite of the bunch being the aforementioned insurance episode (TV Anime Epsiode 37, "I'm Selling Peace of Mind/Safety on Sales"). Without getting into spoilers, part of what makes it great is how the episode highlights how hard it is to avoid a lot of property damage when it comes to piloting giant robots. But I'm now rambling a bit too much, so let me jump ahead to the last bit about what I like about Patlabor.

This Series Loves Giant Robots

More than anything else, Patlabor loves its giant robots. My first time learning about this series was seeing some random user on Reddit go "See, unlike Gundam, Patlabor is cool." And if there are two things that make me, as an ardent fan of mecha anime, really upset, it's one of at least three things:

Bashing series X in order to prop up series Y (Bonus points if its Gundam)

Saying X is unlike other mecha shows because X focuses on the characters (No 86/Evangelion/Code Geass/Gurren Lagann fans, 86/Eva/CG/TTGL is not special, especially when Fang of the Sun Dougram/Space Runaway Ideon/Mobile Suit Gundam/Getter Robo exist.)

Denigrating a series because it's not super realistic (Basically the whole "Real vs Super" debate. I'll touch on it when I talk about G Gundam.)

But after watching Patlabor on my own, I realized that this series really loves its giant robots. It's often shown through both the worldbuilding, which is really just an excuse to justify having giant robots in the setting to begin with, and also the fact that it's main character is, for all intents and purposes, a mecha otaku.

Final Thoughts

Off the top of my head, I don't really have much else to say about Patlabor for now. Granted, there were a lot of things I didn't get to talk about in depth like how the computer systems the Labors employ are, in my opinion, a great example of a seemingly realistic take on AI (not the generative kind, just AI in general), or how one of my favorite character interactions in the series is the pseudo parent-child bond between Chief Engineer Sakaki and Noa and how their relationship reminds me of my relationship with my dad. Most importantly, while I do have an overall preference of the TV timeline over the OVA timeline, I don't think it's necessarily better. The two timelines have their own strengths, but both timelines benefit from the other existing. It also doesn't cut down on the fact that there are still people out there who enjoy Patlabor, and that's really all that matters.

Anyways, I'm going to go crawl back into a hole and wait for any morsel of news involving Patlabor EZY.

[therotatingvillain]

Funny things in Baby Steps, my unfinished Pokevillain fanfic

Alright, after spending too long in a severe depression hole and also spending like way too much time at work, here I am again!

This is gonna be my first update on the Pokevillain fanfiction that my last post was about. What I’m doing is reading through those 43 pages and just get a base understanding of what the fuck I was even doing.

To have all of you be part of this, you’ll get my live thoughts about it! So be ready for some shitposting and a few sneak peeks at the story haha

Cyrus insisting on just being called ‘Cyrus’ because ‘Mr. Akagi’ reminds him of his father is such a mood. Also, yeah, I use their japanese names as their last names, except Guzma, because Guzmas japanese name is Guzma lol So for him I just used his german name ‘Bromley’. Such an ass name

Having stayed in a hospital for the first time not too long ago, 2020 me was surprisingly accurate when it came to hospital food

“What do you think? Aren’t you supposed to be incredibly smart?” She kept smiling, but Cyrus knew it was fake. It had been ever since she entered. It was the same smile his mother always had when talking to guests or clients. God I hate Cyrus nurse, I made her such a bitch lmao

Forgot I made Cyrus lactose intolerant lol

That smile made Cyrus want to go back into the distortion world No comment needed

‘New Guy’ seemed like a major downgrade from ‘God of a new dimension’ but for now, having terribly failed the latter one, the first one was acceptable. 2020 me had banger humor

Guzma looking at Cyrus and just going “You’re my friend now” is how I make all of my friends

Ah yeah, Giovanni is there because of another failed attempt, except for Guzma the rest is there because of court mandation and Guzma is there because Nanu got him a spot.

almost like touching a Rotom that couldn’t quite control its energy. Foreshadowing? Maybe

Guzma immediately having Cyrus back even when Cyrus is clearly in the wrong is so funny to me

Aaaaaaaah gays bonding over piano music

Ah yes, Maxie and Archie are divorced husbands. Yes, they still love each other, yes, Maxie still actively wears his wedding ring while Archie always has it on him somehow

“Hey fuckers, time for lunch!” Mood Guz

Lysandre desperately trying to socialise with his roommate only to routinely be fucked over by his own shitty mental health and eating disorder is too real man

Dr. Roberts is such a kind soul, he’s the therapist OC I created specifically for this story and he’s just a sweetie who’s fantastic at his job and also, obviously, gay and married with a couple kids.

Cyrus went to college (duh) and majored in: Electrical Engineering, Economics, Computer Engineering, Political Science and Computer Science. And finished all his majors in 4 years. Yikes dude, my boy just wanted to study the stars but he was denied by his bullshit parents

Ah yes, Cyrus sister. Buckle in people, time for a bit of lore:

So we all remember the Old Chateau in Eterna Forrest back in gen 4, right? Right. For a long time there was a theory that perhaps Cyrus grew up in that house. How did we come to that conclusion? Basically, Cyrus in Platinum (and the USUM Rainbow Rocket episode) has a severe obsession with the Pokemon Rotom, supplying Charon with detailed notes and diaries all about it and in the Rainbow Rocket episode, he nearly has a breakdown upon seeing the Rotom dex. Now where do you find Rotom in Gen 4? Hiding in a TV in the Old Chateau. So, we theorized that Cyrus grew up there. What else do we find in the Old Chateau? The spirits of a butler and a small girl. So, the theory goes that Cyrus used to have a little sister, but she and a butler of the family were killed in an accident, probably involving the Rotom Cyrus kept, most likely hidden from his parents. Afterwards, his family moved to Sunyshore, leaving the Chateau, where Rotom was still hiding, possibly having come back in search of it’s friend (Cyrus) and then hiding in the TV because it was scared as it was alone, Cyrus nowhere to be found, and sought comfort in the electrical appliance. That’s how the theory goes. This theory is true in my story.

Maxie and Archie being extremely angry bordering on violent with each other makes me sad. And I wrote this shit!

The fact that Cyrus, on his first day there, immediately has a panic attack in the evening is relatable.

Also, Giovanni helps him through it and they start bonding and being cute hehe

For every scene involving stargazing, be aware that I have zero idea about stars. I grew up in the middle of fuck nowhere, so I can see them very clearly each night, but I still have little to no idea about how to read stars lol

Lysandre has anorexia and Cyrus is way too oblivious to understand that it’s ana so he’s just constantly like “wow youre thin” until it clicks lmao

Saturn, Jupiter, Mars and Charon are just codenames and Cyrus never bothered to learn their actual names. Is this also foreshadowing? Maybe hehe

YES CYRUS STAND YOUR GROUND TO THAT PISS POOR EXCUSE OF A NURSE i hate her so much man

Cyrus is a deeply kind person. I will not elaborate yet

Yes, Maxie and Archie get over their shit and back together

Yes, it spirals Giovanni into another suicide attempt

No, I shall not elaborate how one leads to the other

But yeah, there’s a pretty intense part of this that deals with Giovannis shitty mental state and his active suicide attempt (that only barely failed) and Cyrus ends up having a severe breakdown because of it. Like I said in my last post, this story deals with some heavy topics.

Guz and Ly really take on the roles of dads to Cyrus, to help him be more open in his expression and just be who he is and I think that’s beautiful

His breath was caught in his throat, his chest and stomach spreading a comfortable warmth through his body.

What was this? A heart attack? 

No, those felt different. There was no stabbing pain. I love writing Cyrus

THERAPY POKEMON EVERYONE yes the leaders are getting therapy Pokemon

Here’s a list of who they get:

Giovanni: His Persian

Maxie: Toxel

Archie: Hypno

Cyrus: His Rotom

Ghetsis: Castform

Lysandre: Levanny

Guzma: His Golisopod

I’d love for yall to theorize on why each leader gets their respective Pokemon! I actually put some thought in all of them haha

Cyrus grandfather has a big role in Cyrus’ recovery, and it starts with a simple visit that is still one of my favorite parts of this story so far

Cyrus grandfather (Paul Akagi) is the polar opposite to his parents, Paul is kind, loving, supportive and really just wants Cyrus to be happy and their relationship???? it warms my heart

A big part of connection for all of the leaders, specifically everyone else and Ghetsis, is a broken piano in the common room that they all work together to fix and that piano really is a symbol for Cyrus’ recovery and especially his willingness to get better.

GUZMA IS TRANS and this is a fact because I am trans and I said so. Also Ghetsis is a bigot. End of sentence lol

Ghetsis saying some transphobic shit and Guzma then going to PULL HIS NON PARALYZED ARM OUT OF ITS SOCKET is such a girly pop move

Also yes everything I’ve written so far ends on Maxie and Archie remarrying and Dr. Roberts allowing everyone to drink alcohol in celebration and yes of course it escalates lol

Alright everyone, that’s it for now, I’m all caught up, hopefully I’ll get some time to actually write a bit more the next few days. 

As always, please please please interact with this, tell me your thoughts so far, ask questions, I NEED IT okay cool thank you.

I have work tomorrow so I shall go and kill myself lol

Have a great whenever you are! Stay hydrated

Love all of you.

[dailyanarchistposts]

I.4 How could an anarchist economy function?

This is an important question facing all opponents of a given system — what will you replace it with? We can say, of course, that it is pointless to make blueprints of how a future anarchist society will work as the future will be created by everyone, not just the few anarchists and libertarian socialists who write books and FAQs. This is very true, we cannot predict what a free society will actually be like or develop and we have no intention to do so here. However, this reply (whatever its other merits) ignores a key point, people need to have some idea of what anarchism aims for before they decide to spend their lives trying to create it.

So, how would an anarchist system function? That depends on the economic ideas people have. A mutualist economy will function differently than a communist one, for example, but they will have similar features. As Rudolf Rocker put it:

“Common to all Anarchists is the desire to free society of all political and social coercive institutions which stand in the way of development of a free humanity. In this sense Mutualism, Collectivism and Communism are not to be regarded as closed systems permitting no further development, but merely as economic assumptions as to the means of safeguarding a free community. There will even probably be in society of the future different forms of economic co-operation operating side by side, since any social progress must be associated with that free experiment and practical testing out for which in a society of free communities there will be afforded every opportunity.” [Anarcho-Syndicalism, p. 9]

So given the common ideals and aims of anarchists, it is unsurprising that the economic systems we suggest has common features such as workers’ self-management, federation, free agreement and so on (as discussed in last section). For all anarchists, ”[t]he task for a modern industrial society is to achieve what is now technically realisable, namely, a society which is really based on free voluntary participation of people who produce and create, live their lives freely within institutions they control, and with limited hierarchical structures, possibly none at all.” [Noam Chomsky, quoted by Albert and Hahnel, Looking Forward, p. 62]

This achieved by means of “voluntary association that will organise labour, and be the manufacturer and distributor of necessary commodities” and this ”is to make what is useful. The individual is to make what is beautiful.” [Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism, p. 1183] For example, the machine “will supersede hand-work in the manufacture of plain goods. But at the same time, hand-work very probably will extend its domain in the artistic finishing of many things which are made entirely in the factory.” [Peter Kropotkin, Fields, Factories and Workplaces Tomorrow, p. 152] Murray Bookchin, decades later, argued for the same idea: “the machine will remove the toil from the productive process, leaving its artistic completion to man.” [Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 134]

The aim would be to maximise the time available for individuals to express and development their individuality, including in production. As Stirner put it, the “organisation of labour touches only such labours as others can do for us… the rest remain egoistic, because no one can in your stead elaborate your musical compositions, carry out your projects of painting, etc.; nobody can replace Raphael’s labours. The latter are labours of a unique person, which only he is competent to achieve.” Criticising the authoritarian socialists of his time, Stirner went on to ask “for whom is time to be gained [by association]? For what does man require more time than is necessary to refresh his wearied powers of labour? Here Communism is silent.” He then answers his own question by arguing it is gained for the individual ”[t]o take comfort in himself as unique, after he has done his part as man!” [Max Stirner, The Ego and Its Own, p. 268 and p. 269] Which is exactly what libertarian communists argue:

”[We] recognise that man [sic!] has other needs besides food, and as the strength of Anarchy lies precisely in that it understands all human faculties and all passions, and ignores none, we shall … contrive to satisfy all his intellectual and artistic needs … the man [or woman] who will have done the four or five hours of … work that are necessary for his existence, will have before him five or six hours which his will seek to employ according to tastes … “He will discharge his task in the field, the factory, and so on, which he owes to society as his contribution to the general production. And he will employ the second half of his day, his week, or his year, to satisfy his artistic or scientific needs, or his hobbies.” [Kropotkin, Conquest of Bread, pp. 110–1]

Thus, while authoritarian Communism ignores the unique individual (and that was the only kind of Communism existing when Stirner wrote his classic book) libertarian communists agree with Stirner and are not silent. Like him, they consider the whole point of organising labour is to provide the means of providing the individual with the time and resources required to express their individuality. In other words, to pursue “labours of a unique person.” Thus all anarchists base their arguments for a free society on how it will benefit actual individuals, rather than abstracts or amorphous collectives (such as “society”). Hence chapter 9 of The Conquest of Bread, “The Need for Luxury” and, for that matter, chapter 10, “Agreeable Work.”

In other words, anarchists desire to organise voluntary workers associations which will try to ensure a minimisation of mindless labour in order to maximise the time available for creative activity both inside and outside “work.” This is to be achieved by free co-operation between equals, which is seen as being based on self-interest. After all, while capitalist ideology may proclaim that competition is an expression of self-interest it, in fact, results in the majority of people sacrificing themselves for the benefits of the few who own and control society. The time you sell to a boss in return for them ordering you about and keeping the product of your labour is time you never get back. Anarchists aim to end a system which crushes individuality and create one in which solidarity and co-operation allow us time to enjoy life and to gain the benefits of our labour ourselves. Mutual Aid, in other words, results in a better life than mutual struggle and so “the association for struggle will be a much more effective support for civilisation, progress, and evolution than is the struggle for existence with its savage daily competitions.” [Luigi Geallani, The End of Anarchism, p. 26]

In the place of the rat race of capitalism, economic activity in an anarchist society would be one of the means to humanise and individualise ourselves and society, to move from surviving to living. Productive activity should become a means of self-expression, of joy, of art, rather than something we have to do to survive. Ultimately, “work” should become more akin to play or a hobby than the current alienated activity. The priorities of life should be towards individual self-fulfilment and humanising society rather than “running society as an adjunct to the market,” to use Polanyi’s expression, and turning ourselves into commodities on the labour market. Thus anarchists agree with John Stuart Mill:

“I confess I am not charmed with an ideal of life held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other’s heels, which form the existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human kind, or anything but the disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress.” [Collected Works, vol. III, p. 754]

The aim of anarchism is far more than the end of inequality. Hence Proudhon’s comment that socialism’s “underlying dogma” is that the “objective of socialism is the emancipation of the proletariat and the eradication of poverty.” This emancipation would be achieved by ending “wage slavery” via “democratically organised workers’ associations.” [No Gods, No Masters, vol. 1, p. 57 and p. 62] Or, to use Kropotkin’s expression, “well-being for all” — physical, mental, emotional and ethical! Indeed, by concentrating on just poverty and ignoring the emancipation of the proletariat, the real aims of socialism are obscured:

“The ‘right to well-being’ means the possibility of living like human beings, and of bringing up children to be members of a society better than ours, whilst the ‘right to work’ only means the right to be a wage-slave, a drudge, ruled over and exploited by the middle class of the future. The right to well-being is the Social Revolution, the right to work means nothing but the Treadmill of Commercialism. It is high time for the worker to assert his right to the common inheritance, and to enter into possession of it.” [Kropotkin, Op. Cit., p. 44]

So, while refusing to define exactly how an anarchist system will work, we will explore the implications of how the anarchist principles and ideals outlined above could be put into practice. Bear in mind that this is just a possible framework for a system which has few historical examples to draw upon. This means that we can only indicate the general outlines of what an anarchist society could be like. Those seeking blue-prints and exactness should look elsewhere. In all likelihood, the framework we present will be modified and changed (even ignored) in light of the real experiences and problems people will face when creating a new society.

We should point out that there may be a tendency for some to compare this framework with the theory of capitalism (i.e. perfectly functioning “free” markets or quasi-perfect ones) as opposed to its reality. A perfectly working capitalist system only exists in text books and in the heads of ideologues who take the theory as reality. No system is perfect, particularly capitalism, and to compare “perfect” text-book capitalism with any real system is a pointless task. As we discussed in depth in section C, capitalist economics does not even describe the reality of capitalism so why think it would enlighten discussion of post-capitalist systems? What hope does it have of understanding post-capitalist systems which reject its proprietary despotism and inequalities? As anarchists aim for a qualitative change in our economic relationships, we can safely say that its economic dynamics will reflect the specific forms it will develop rather than those produced by a class-ridden hierarchical system like capitalism and the a-historic individualistic abstractions invented to defend it!

So any attempt to apply the notions developed from theorising about (or, more correctly, justifying and rationalising) capitalism to anarchism will fail to capture the dynamics of a non-capitalist system. John Crump stressed this point in his discussion of Japanese anarchism between the World Wars:

“When considering the feasibility of the social system advocated by the pure anarchists, we need to be clear about the criteria against which it should be measured. It would, for example, be unreasonable to demand that it be assessed against such yardsticks of a capitalist economy as annual rate of growth, balance of trade and so forth … evaluating anarchist communism by means of the criteria which have been devised to measure capitalism’s performance does not make sense … capitalism would be … baffled if it were demanded that it assess its operations against the performance indicators to which pure anarchists attached most importance, such as personal liberty, communal solidarity and the individual’s unconditional right to free consumption. Faced with such demands, capitalism would either admit that these were not yardsticks against which it could sensibly measure itself or it would have to resort to the type of grotesque ideological subterfuges which it often employs, such as identifying human liberty with the market and therefore with wage slavery … The pure anarchists’ confidence in the alternative society they advocated derived not from an expectation that it would quantitatively outperform capitalism in terms of GNP, productivity or similar capitalist criteria. On the contrary, their enthusiasm for anarchist communism flowed from their understanding that it would be qualitatively different from capitalism. Of course, this is not to say that the pure anarchists were indifferent to questions of production and distribution … they certainly believed that anarchist communism would provide economic well-being for all. But neither were they prepared to give priority to narrowly conceived economic expansion, to neglect individual liberty and communal solidarity, as capitalism regularly does.” [Hatta Shuzo and Pure Anarchism in Interwar Japan, pp. 191–3]

Finally, anarchists are well aware that transforming how an economy works does not happen overnight. As discussed in section I.2.2, we have long rejected the idea of instantaneous social transformation and argued that revolution will take time to develop and change the legacy of centuries of class and hierarchical society. This transformation and the resulting changes in people and surroundings can only be achieved by the full participation of all in overcoming the (many) problems a free society will face and the new ways of relating to each other liberation implies. A free people will find their own practical solutions to their problems, for “there will be all sorts of practical difficulties to overcome, but the [libertarian socialist] system is simplicity itself compared with the monster of centralised State control, which sets such an inhuman distance between the worker and the administrator that there is room for a thousand difficulties to intervene.” [Herbert Read, Anarchy and Order, p. 49] Thus, for anarchists, the “enthusiasm generated by the revolution, the energies liberated, and the inventiveness stimulated by it must be given full freedom and scope to find creative channels.” [Alexander Berkman, What is Anarchism?, p. 223] As such, the ideas within this section of our FAQ are merely suggestions, possibilities.