#because by the end of genocide you have to make the decision to kill them all in the blink of an eye—as youve been doing the entire game—

[down-thedrain]

"this world will live on...!" girl no it wont im sorry

[stil-lindigo]

"Kamala Harris has earned an eleventh-hour show of support from Palestinian, Arab and Muslim community leaders."

On October 24th, a collective statement titled "Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and Progressive Democrats and Community Leaders Statement on Presidential Election" was published.

The 100+ signees include current or former leaders of Palestinian, Arab and Muslim organisations, the leader of Phoenix, AZ's largest mosque, Jewish activists and other elected officials. All of them have been listed at the bottom of this post.

You can read the whole statement here but I've also copy-pasted it's entire contents below.

Read. The Whole. Thing.

It is concise and will only take you a few minutes. While you read, recognise that these words are not representative of every single person belonging to these demographics. Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims are not a monolith, and have a right to feel any way they do about this election. To those who do not belong to these groups - refrain from adding your personal commentary in the tags, and understand how excruciating of a place this statement must have come from for both the authors, signees and the communities they represent.

---

Arizona Palestinian, Arab, Muslim, and Progressive Democrats and Community Leaders Statement on Presidential Election

As Democrats and leaders in the Palestinian, Arab, Muslim and Progressive communities in Arizona, we the undersigned make the following statement, published on 10/24/2024:

This past year has been very difficult for all of us. With over 42,000 Palestinians killed by Israel using American-supplied weapons and no end in sight despite all our struggle for a ceasefire, we approach the presidential election heartbroken and outraged.

We know that many in our communities are resistant to vote for Kamala Harris because of the Biden administration’s complicity in the genocide. We understand this sentiment. Many of us have felt that way ourselves, even until very recently. Some of us have lost many family members in Gaza and Lebanon. We respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones.

As we consider the full situation carefully, however, we conclude that voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities. We know that some will strongly disagree. We only ask that you consider our case with an open mind and heart, respecting that we are doing what we believe is right in an awful situation where only flawed choices are available.

In our view, it is crystal clear that allowing the fascist Donald Trump to become President again would be the worst possible outcome for the Palestinian people. A Trump win would be an extreme danger to Muslims in our country, all immigrants, and the American pro-Palestine movement. It would be an existential threat to our democracy and our whole planet.

When we think of Trump in power again, we recall that even a genocide can get much worse. Trump just said that Netanhahu must “go further” in Gaza while criticizing Biden for “trying to hold him back.” His biggest donor, Miriam Adelson, who demanded in 2016 that Trump move the US embassy to Jerusalem if elected –– which he then did –– is now telling Trump to allow Israel to annex the entire West Bank. Netanyahu, Ben Gvir, Smotrich, and the entire far right in Israel want Trump to win and grant Israel total free reign. We cannot give them what they want.

Trump must be defeated. The only way to defeat him is to elect Kamala Harris.

Voting for Harris is not a personal endorsement of her or of the policy decisions of the administration in which she served. It’s an assessment of the best possible option to continue fighting for an end to the genocide, a free Palestine, and all else that we hold dear.

We are deeply frustrated that Harris has not yet met our movement’s demand that she break with Biden, defy the powerful extremists enforcing the status quo, stand with the majority of Americans, and pledge to uphold US law and international law and condition aid to Israel. Still we believe there are clear reasons to hope that we can win positive policy change with a Harris administration and a Democratic Congress.

Multiple media reports state that Harris’s national security advisors are open to re-evaluating policy and conditioning aid to Israel. On October 13th, the same day the administration threatened to re-evaluate military support if Israel did not improve humanitarian conditions in Gaza and reduce civilian casualties in the next 30 days, Harris tweeted: “Israel must urgently do more to facilitate the flow of aid to those in need. Civilians must be protected and have access to food, water, and medicine. International humanitarian law must be respected.” In Michigan the other day, Harris expressed clear empathy for the suffering of the people of Palestine and Lebanon and the impact of this devastation on Arab Americans. She pledged to do “everything in her power” as President to end the war in Gaza, end the suffering of Palestinians there, and achieve “a future of security and dignity for all people in the region.”

Beyond Harris’s statements, we know that her decisions as President will be shaped by the larger Democratic Party coalition that includes a growing force pushing for Palestinian human rights. Our Arizona Democratic Party passed a resolution calling for a ceasefire in January. Every single member of Congress who has publicly called for a ceasefire in Gaza or for an arms embargo is a Democrat. The major national unions, civil rights groups, and progressive organizations that have called for a halt to military aid to Israel are all working to elect Harris.

On the other hand, the Republican Party coalition offers zero opposition to unconditional support for Israel and zero support for Palestinian human rights. Instead Republicans urge the US to join Israel in bombing Iran, call to “bounce the rubble in Gaza” and “kill ‘em all,” and would likely support the Israeli far right’s drive to annex Gaza and the West Bank.

What about a third party? Many in our communities believe this is our best option. Unfortunately, there is not a single third party member of Congress or even state legislator in America. In our electoral system, no third party candidate can win this election. But voting for them could make Trump president.

The polls show the presidential election is extremely close and that it will be decided by 7 swing states, including Arizona. While voting 3rd party may be strategic in non-swing states as a protest of the current US Israel/Palestine policy or as a step to qualifying the Green Party for public funding in future elections by winning at least 5% of the national vote, doing it in Arizona or other swing states in such a close election could bring disaster.

Some argue that if Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim voters and our allies vote for a 3rd party candidate and intentionally throw the election to Trump, taking credit for defeating Harris, it will prove our power to decide a close election and “punish Democrats” for complicity in genocide. Unfortunately, this is not how power, politics, or change works in our country. When Ralph Nader helped throw the election to Bush in 2000, he was rejected by millions for whom he was once a hero, banished ever since to the political margins. When Jill Stein helped throw the election to Trump in 2016, she remained relegated to the political fringe, becoming less powerful not more. If our communities ally with the Green Party to defeat Harris, we risk marginalizing ourselves as they did by alienating the tens of millions of voters who support the cause of Palestinian freedom and are fighting to defeat Trump by electing her.

Instead, by helping to elect Kamala Harris, we can say, “Despite it all, we gave you another chance and helped put you in office to defend democracy and uphold our highest American values. Now uphold them: end the genocide and secure Palestinian self-determination. We will fight every day to hold you to it.” If Harris and Democrats win, we will wage that fight with more allies among the American people, Congress, and the White House than ever before. If they don’t deliver, we will have a mandate and mass support to hold them accountable through every nonviolent tool of democracy, including protests, resignations, civil disobedience, primary election challenges, and even potential mass noncooperation. It’s a difficult path, but the one that offers the most hope.

The first step –– and our best choice in this horrible situation –– is defeating Trump by electing Harris. We urge you to join us.

Signers (affiliations listed for identification purposes only):

Maher Arekat, Founder, Palestine Community Center of Arizona

Usama Shami, President, Islamic Community Center of Phoenix

Fadi Zanayed, Vice President, American Federation of Ramallah, Palestine - Arizona

Shams AbdusSamad, Secretary, Maricopa County Dem Party; ADP Exec Cmte Mmbr - At Large & SCM

Samir Mufarreh, Palestinian American Christian Community Leader

Jordan Harb, Lebanese American Youth Leader

Stephen Mufarreh, Attorney, Palestinian American Christian Community Leader

Misaal Irfan, Pakistani American Community Leader

Samara Hamideh, Palestinian Youth Organizer

Mohamed El-Sharkawy, Palestinian American and a Muslim leader

Ala Rumah, Syrian American Activist

Dina Hamideh, Coordinator, Arizona Palestine Film Festival

Salauddin Choudhury, Bangladeshi Community Leader; DNC Delegate CD 5; LD 14 SCM

Hani Hani, President, American Federation of Ramallah, Palestine - Arizona

Dr. Navid Khan, Pakistani American Community Leader

Deena Mufarreh, Chair, American Federation of Ramallah, Palestine - Arizona

Syed Nasir Raza, Progressive Pakistani-American Community Leader; AZ Progressives

Ashraf Elgamal, President, Arab American Organization

Salina Imam, Charity Program Leader

Sawsan Tannous, Chair, American Federation of Ramallah, Palestine - Arizona

Saher Afzal, Pakistani American, Arizona Education Association member, and Exec board AEA local

Nathan Mufara, Chair, American Federation of Ramallah, Palestine - Arizona

Dr. Jaffrey Khazi, Community Leader

Hashim Hamid , Palestinian American Community Elder and Retired Businessman

​​Ameena Arekat, Palestinian American Health Care Worker

Mo Al Hwan Bahu, Palestinian American Christian

Deanna Dabbah, Former President, Arab American Anti-Discrimination Cmte, Fountain Hills, AZ

Dr. Hazem Jabr, Palestinian American Dentist

Jack Saba, Syrian American Entertainer & Democratic Voter

Ramzi Arikat, Palestinian American Business Owner in Phoenix

Shaikh F Shams, LD13 PC & State Cmte Member, Bangladeshi American Community Leader

Hussein Jabr, Palestinian American Doctor

Md Ibrahim Faisal, Bangladeshi American Progressive Democrats

Dean Dabbah, Community Activist, Fountain Hills, AZ

Mazen Arekat, Palestinian American Business Owner

Sujat Jamil, Bangladeshi American Progressive Democrats

Rocky Francis, Iraqi American Businessman

Hazem Arekat, Palestinian American Businessman

Arif Mahmud, Volunteer

Qumrul Ahsan, Precinct committee member LD13

Shahriar Anwar, LD13

Menassa Abinader, Lebanese American; Owner, Mejana Restaurant

Charlotte Hosseini, Sedona Resident ; Concerned citizen and voter

Tan Jakwani, Muslim Community Leader

William Havel, Iraqi Refugee

Jennifer Loewenstein, Jewish Voice for Peace - Tucson ; Arizona Palestine Network (AZ PAL)

Jessica Burke, Jewish Community Member & Progressive Activist

Bob Lord, Former Arizona Congressional Candidate, Jewish Community Member

Rachel Port, Jewish Voice for Peace -  Tucson

Laurie Melrood, Jewish Voice for Peace - Tucson; LD 20

Rep. Mariana Sandoval, LD 23

Rep. Quantá Crews, LD 26 ; State and Precinct Committee Person

Martín J. Quezada, Former State Senator

School Board Member Patti Serrano, PC and State Committee Member LD 13, 2020 Delegate

Kai Newkirk, Co-Chair, Arizona Democratic Party Progressive Council

Erika Andiola, Immigrant Rights Leader & Bernie 2016 Latino Outreach Press Secretary

Mikkel Jordahl, Attorney

Belén Sisa, Former Latino Press Secretary for Bernie 2020 and DACA Recipient

Salil Deshpande, LD18 State Committee Member; DNC Standing Committee Member

Dan O’Neal, Progressive Democrats of America - Arizona State Coordinator

Armonee D. Jackson, President, Young Democrats of Arizona

Eva Putzova, Former City of Flagstaff Councilmember

Emily Kirkland, PC LD 8; Former Executive Director, Progress Arizona

Melissa Galarza, Chair, LD12 Democrats

Cameron Bautista, Youth Organizer & School Board Coordinator, KeepAZBlue Student Coalition

Nick Collins, LD 12 State Cmte Member, Progressive Council Interim Steering Committee

Ken Kenegos, LD 18 PC, member Progressive Democrats of America

Michael Bradley, Arizona Palestine Network, LD 4 PC

David Higgins, Co-Founder, Arizona Palestine Network (AZ PAL)

Natacha Chavez, Precinct committee person LD 22

Sarah León, Community organizer

Elizabeth Hourican, CODEPINK Phoenix

Emily Verdugo, Community Leader

Kyle Nitschke, LD 6 State Committee Member

Barbara J. Taft, Leadership Team, WILPF US Middle East Peace and Justice Action Committee

Nicole Gutiérrez Miller, State and Precinct Committee Person, LD 12

Dianne Post, International Human Rights Attorney

Lindsay Love, Owner & therapist at TherapyLuv, PLLC ; former CUSD school board member

Joan Etude Arrow, Founder, Arizona Progressive Action Community (AZPAC)

Elizabeth Ogren, LD5 PC and State Committee Member

Jenise Porter, PC and State Committeeperson AZ LD18

Dave Wells, United Campus Workers of AZ, PC LD9

Andreas Clayton La Grow, Community Organizer

Robert Flamida, Palestine Community Center of Arizona, Member

Dr. Marannagan, Autistics for Peace

Bonnie L Lynn, State Committee Member

Frederic Artus, LD 5

Isabel O’Neal, State Committee, PC LD 14, CD 5 Immigration Advocate

Deborah Arekat, Democratic Voter

Asfandyar Khalid, Na

Kathy F. Yontz, PC LD12

Pardis Baradar, LD 12 PC

Grace Wagner Democrat LD8

Laiken Jordahl, Community organizer/advocate

Kathryn Soderquist, Constituent, AZ LD 9

Jana Rose Ochs, Progressive Democrats of America, Progressive Activist

Victoria Eloisa Ramos, Community Leader

Aaron J Essif, LD17 PC & SCM, PDA, Indivisibles

Judith Hilton Coburn, Member, CodePink Phoenix, PDA, Phoenix Anti War Coalition

Dev Gautam Dogra, Progressive social democratic student from The University of Arizona

Peggy Thomas, Progressive Democrats of America activist

Anne Khoury, Concerned citizen and voter 

Emily Williams, Democrat LD 12

Molly Donnelly, PC LD 12

[kudossi]

Tigerclaw and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Senior Warrior Position AU

In a world where deputies can only be named after their first apprentice has been granted their warrior name, Tigerclaw struggles to keep an apprentice alive long enough to earn their name.

or, a comedy-tragedy AU in which having an apprentice isn't enough — you have to see them to their warrior name, and Tigerclaw cannot fucking get any of his goddamn apprentices to live, damn it.

—

It starts out mostly normally, except for the fact that Tigerclaw hasn't gotten any apprentices to their warrior name, and he needs that so he can accomplish his (very noble, of course) kitty genocide goals. And also be the supreme leader of the world or something. Darkpaw died stupidly, he hasn't had a chance since, and now he's got some tiny thing that's afraid of his own shadow.

Well. It'll have to do.

So naturally this man is so protective over Ravenpaw that Ravenpaw barely even leaves his sight. Firepaw and Graypaw think that this is adorable. Look how much Tigerclaw cares about his apprentice!!

Ravenpaw, of course, is fucking terrified and also slowly losing his mind, just in a different way.

—

"Redtail assigned us to go on a patrol to Snakerocks." "OH NO HE DID NOT. WE'RE STAYING IN THE SANDY HOLLOW WHERE IT'S SAFE."

"Nothing matters more to me than making you a warrior, Ravenpaw. Nothing." And the terrible thing is that Ravenpaw is sure he's being sincere.

—

Ravenpaw disappears and Tigerclaw nearly fucking has a conniption because the timing was all RIGHT and he was going to finally get the position AND HE NEVER GOT HIS DAMN NAME FUCK.

"Do you think I could convince the elders that Fireheart was my apprentice?" "Fireheart was Bluestar's apprentice, as approved by StarClan. You're going to have to wait for the next litter to be apprenticed."

So he begs and begs and gets Cinderpaw and then she accidentally falls into the trap he'd set for a better deputy candidate at the Thunderpath. Fuck.

—

Well. Time to resort to drastic measures.

"I was thinking that Darkstripe would have been a good name. Because he had dark stripes." "Again, Tigerclaw, it's admirable that you loved your apprentice so much, but I cannot grant him a name." "Are you sure?" "Honestly, Tigerclaw, I'm not sure he ever would have gotten a name. Missing quite a few feathers from his nest, that one..." Fuck. The worst part was that she wasn't even wrong.

— Swiftpaw and Brightpaw get mauled by the dogs he set up to happen like right after he got the title and they sprang it before and he's like FUCK NOW WHAT DO I DO WITH THESE DAMN DOGS? His world domination plans literally never come to fruition because he cannot keep his apprentices alive/in the clan/his own.

— "Brightheart counts. She HAS to count." "Actually, Cloudtail took over her training…" [demented noises]

—

Turns out that Ravenpaw is alive and no one — no one — in the Harper Collins Extended Universe is happier than Tigerclaw.

"You're alive! …You deserve your warrior name!" "Actually, I've come to peace with my name and my way of life. I have no need for a—" "GET YOUR FUCKING NAME RIGHT NOW RAVENPAW OR SO HELP ME STARCLAN—" "I know you really wanted Ravenpaw to become a warrior," Barley says gently, "but he's made his decision. It's very kind of you to acknowledge that he deserves it, though. You must have been so close as mentor and apprentice." Tigerclaw's eye twitches. "Yes. Close. Very... close." —

He finally, finally retires as an elder after his plans go absolutely nowhere for years on end. And maybe StarClan is still like "Brambleclaw would be chill actually, we can forget that pesky little law" and Tigerclaw is sitting there like "excuse me what the actual fuck?" —

But at this point Tigerclaw is about as dangerous as Ashfur without a freak forest fire. Which is to say about as dangerous as using a leaf as a weapon. Which is, incidentally, how Darkpaw managed to get himself killed in the first place.

—

"Is this the Dark Forest? This has to be the Dark Forest. It doesn't look like Thistleclaw described it, but it must be. This Clan is all an elaborate punishment meted down by StarClan for my sins." "Tigerclaw, sir, I'm just here to help you with your ticks. See? I have the mousebile right here." "…Yes, thank you, Alderpaw." — Graystripe joins him in the elder's den and he's like, "You know, Ravenpaw thought you were up to some… scheme, back in the day. Crazy, right? You've been a model Clanmate as long as I've been alive." [muffled screaming] "Huh, what do you think that is? It sounds almost like someone killed a rabbit, but they know not to come this close to camp…"

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

I’m always curious about Kankri being redeemed in any way (maybe because he can become the sufferer). Obviously to do so would be simply punting him to reality and force him to live it, no help from his shoddily-made support structure. But I’m curious how you would go about doing it

Given their role thematically in the story, I'm actually usually not on the train of "fully redeem the dancestors", but I do like giving them some catharsis and reckoning, a place in the fight against LE. One last chance to do something good with their lives/afterlives before the end, and a(n implied) new start as wigglers born into the new universe.

So to that end, in my head, the "turnaround point" for Kankri - the inciting incident that makes him have a mental breakdown that results in him finally taking some accountability for his shitty actions - is having a conversation with Eridan.

In my head, the Dancestor reckoning happens gradually, alongside a series of retcons where the dead trolls are brought back one or two at a time, and deal with their emotional issues a little more with every cast member added back into the party.

The TL;DR series of events is: Terezi asks to bring back Vriska, Vriska asks John to punch out Tavros before she can kill him, Tavros's influence makes Gamzee ask for Equius and Nepeta to be brought back, Equius asks for a redux of Aradiabot, Aradiabot grabs John by the arm and gets him to undo her death and Sollux's fall into depression, Sollux asks for Feferi to be brought back, and then Karkat asks for Eridan.

We know from (Vriska) that the Game Over/Alpha Timeline characters still exist post-Retcon, so those characters would also be continuing their character arcs, just in the afterlife prepping for the LE fight. For example, I think Meenah's reckoning should be delivered by (Karkat) - after having had so long to reflect on his own failures as a leader, he would be perfectly poised to scream at her for hers, which would also serve to make this confrontation a final thesis for Karkat as a whole - what leadership means (caring about your team) - and a conclusion to the Meenah/Karkat dynamic.

So when I say that Kankri needs to talk to Eridan, I mean Eridan and not (Eridan). Full character development, all his teammates are alive, taken full accountability and responsibility for his actions, team good guy Eridan. And as I noted in this essay, Eridan with full character development is actually more annoying than regular Eridan, because he's also the "Devastating: Worst Guy You Know Made An Excellent Point" guy. In bulleted form:

He's still an advocate for murder. Murder is literally what kept his friends alive long enough to play the game, and playing the game itself involves genocide, so he would be the Token Evil Teammate who reminds the team that, hey, murder is an option - and enemies will be considering it. Even at his very best, he's going to struggle with empathy and have an extremely blase view of violence and murder - those were literally just facts of his life through his most formative years.

This also makes him a TOTAL downer, as he's the tempering voice that reminds them that decisions have consequences, and utopia requires sacrifices, and nothing is ever worth fighting for that won't eventually need to be fought for. Like I said, worst guy you know, excellent points. In fact, he's out here volunteering to do the murdering when the situation calls, if nobody else wants to get their fins dirty. He's really good at it.

He's still an idiot who doesn't listen to people. He's perfectly fine at taking orders, but having a conversation with him is still really difficult. I feel like if you make Eridan too smart, mentally flexible, and socially aware, you lose a lot of his Eridan-ness, and I think these characters, fully realized, are more of themselves, not less. I also don't know how you could reasonably expect to fix these traits. He's just Like That.

He drops his fake pro-Empire stuff, because that was basically all just empty posturing in the first place, but...

Now he's a pretentious-ass hipster who judges you for liking Trollor Swift and Troll Marvel. Given that Jake's indiscriminate taste is actually linked to his deficit of Hope (he has little conviction, he's wishy-washy), Eridan coming into full Prince of Hope regalia involves getting even more annoying about his taste in media (shittons of conviction, refusal to budge).

He is also a wizard. He will not shut up about this.

And finally, I think he'd still be out here using slurs. First of all, because it'd be really funny, because he's literally not casteist, but second, because there's two types of "it's equality" - the kind where nobody ever says anything offensive, and the kind where "offensive" stops being a relevant concept because true equality has been achieved. Think of the discourse surrounding the reclamation of slurs IRL, or how the "it's equality" meme gets used - this idea that words can be stripped of power by changing the context of who's saying them, or that objectification/discrimination stop being problems if they're applied evenly across the board, instead of limited to specific groups. I think that this is the exact type of nuanced idea that Homestuck would tackle and its fandom would get incensed about, which is why I think it should stay.

Eridan's role, thus, becomes a sort of "unpleasant truths" kind of character. Violence, both physical and verbal, is unpleasant as hell, and the natural instinct is to avoid it. The problem is, in any true discussion of what society should look like, they're topics that can't be avoided, and are even sometimes necessary not just to recognize, but to utilize (no revolution is bloodless, etc.). Eridan - an extreme personality - is going to represent the uncomfortable extreme of the debate. And by that I mean he's going to be saying slurs and talking about murders and is still going to be unquestionably a force for good.

The reason I'm going so in-depth into this is because Kankri very much represents the opposite: using "polite" language and couching it in the language of courtesy, activism, and liberal ideology, Kankri hides - and worse, spreads - his classist, ableist, misogynistic, puritan beliefs. He enforces the class divide and actively works against his teammates' best interests.

He whines that the lower blood castes should stop complaining about oppression, because others have it worse. He tells the team feminist that misogyny isn't real, then slut shames her. He tells the guy with brain damage that he's making other neurodivergent/TBI people look bad, exacerbates Latula's shame around her inability to smell, and actively guilt trips Cronus into ignoring his epiphany and self-reflection. Kankri is only an activist in that he actively makes everybody worse.

But why does he act like this? Well, it's due to the fact that he was probably culled, and on-sight at that, like Karkat would've been if anyone found out about his mutant blood. Kankri doesn't seem to have a symbol or lusus, either, two thinks Karkat only had because the Signless's followers prepped them for him, so the chances are very high that Kankri was culled since he was hatched. Given the way he discusses culling with Latula, and viciously despises being mothered by Porrim, it's clear he has some really complicated feelings regarding having his agency dismissed. Thus, his work to hamper his team - at least some of which is wilful on his part, as he'll outright cast aspersions on Horuss or Cronus's beliefs for being "imaginary" even as he encourages them to commit to them - is motivated by something quite simple: power, attention, entitlement, and control.

When he goes on his grand lectures, he frequently slips and reveals that he sees himself as a great, unquestionable spiritual leader, often trying to place other characters in subordinate positions to himself - Karkat is his "pupil," and his monologues, I mean, sermons, I mean, diatribes, are spoken as if from a position of authority. He outright tells Meenah that this is what he believes himself to be.

It's a very Seer sort of problem - both that of hubris and that of willful blindness. If you chart out the actual "end goal" of his beliefs, it appears to be a world in which Kankri himself is both the biggest victim and most important voice in the room. He regularly disparages those with actual disadvantages (Damara, Porrim, Mituna) while playing up the false problems of those who don't actually have them (Horuss, Cronus). Those with disadvantages should have their voices amplified - except lowbloods should stop whining and misogyny isn't real. And those with real power should check their privilege - but won't somebody think of the poor highbloods who have ~emotional problems~? Kankri will, and all the highbloods need to do is bend the knee and treat Kankri as their specialest boy.

In short, he's using his intellect, rhetoric, and forceful personality for selfish, emotionally-driven pursuits. The actual substance of his arguments is ephemeral and contradictory because that's the trick - the point is NOT to further equality, but to verbally browbeat his conversation partner into submission. In other words, you can't beat Kankri in a regular debate, because the moment you start trying to actually engage in a debate with him, he wins. The moment you start lunging at his arguments, he's got you in his red-texted labyrinth. The moment you start treating his points like they merit genuine discussion, you're in the pews of Kankri's church, and he's up at the pulpit.

And Eridan is the destroyer of faith. He's also an idiot who doesn't listen to people.

I don't really know exactly how it would play out, but I know in my heart. In the pit of my soul. That Eridan would call Kankri several slurs, (correctly) point out that Kankri's celibacy is stupid because it's clear he has feelings for Cronus and Latula, (correctly) point out that his pro-equality stuff is stupid because he calls violets "Royal-V"s, (incorrectly) accuse Kankri of hitting on him, (correctly) point out that the entire point of a slur is that it hurts and insults the person it's used on, (correctly) call Kankri several more slurs, (correctly) point out that Kankri just wants attention, especially from highbloods, (???) go on an unhinged rant (maybe more) about being a wizard, being a murderer, and being a murderer wizard, (???) insult Kankri's taste in music, and finish it up by (correctly) revealing that Eridan and Karkat are moirails who make out sometimes.

I think Kankri would start crying.

[queen-morgana91]

The fact that certain people dislike Aang because

"He's a pacifist" - he's a monk, guys. Horrifying. Also being a pacifist is a crime it seems. Killing people and starting wars is more cool

"He's childish" - he's 12 🤦‍♂️ he matured a lot during the series and he was forced to grow up quickly like the rest of the gaang. Let alone that most of the time is copyng mechanism, he's dealing with his trauma is his own way

"He didn't kill ozai" - ah yes, still missing the point of the series in 2024. He’s the LAST airbender of a genocided culture. The way this fandom don’t value culture is insane. Which character in this series was ever asked to fore sake their culture? yeah, no one. Aang isn’t wrong for preserving his, stfu

"He had it easy" - the GENOCIDE SURVIVOR had it easy, ok. The lion turtle didn’t give Aang an easy way out. It gave him a choice, after that Aang, the AVATAR aka half spirit, prayed for it. He said he would have killed Ozai if he had no other option and he almost killed him in their fight, but he decided to stay true to himself and to preserve his culture. Aang almost died to take away Ozai's bending, easy my ass. You wanted him to be a cold blooded murderer? watch another series

"He has no development/growth" - sigh. Did we watch the same series? some of you think that you have development if you change personality/beliefs 🤦‍♂️ Aang has a GREAT character development. He makes choices that push him in a way that allows him to move beyond what people, his past lives included, expect of him. He became far more mature and he accepted his role as the Avatar and his responsabilities for the sake of the world. The reason his beliefs never changed is because many characters pressure him to give up his core values which come from a genocided culture. The air nomads, who raised him. If the only way you know of character development/growth is them being forced to change their fundamental beliefs, you don't know what character development means. Aang is the Avatar the world needed and he put an end to the cycles of hatred

"Aang values his culture above other cultures" - lol no he doesn't. Not only Aang is extremely respectful of other cultures (if you talk about the sea prunes again, i swear) but he values his culture because.....again, it was genocided. He never hold it above other cultures, but uses his own to make his own decisions, which is different. Mind you, other characters in the series hold their beliefs above his and dismiss his (Zuko was one of them btw). The adults, like general Fong, literally forced Aang to use violence and the Avatar state. But sure let's ignore it

"He's too perfect/he makes many mistakes" - make up your mind. Not even his haters know wtf they're talking about

"He has a crush on Katara" - how inconceivable. Damn, i'm still traumatized. Also Katara has the audacity to love him back. Horrifying

And then the shipping reasons....yeah i'm not gonna bother here, braindead takes from delusional people

All opinions that i will never ever take seriously, sorry

Free Aang

[wheelie-sick]

I wanted to ask if I could get your personal opinion on cochlear implants as a deaf person? I'm writing an essay for my ASL class and it's really hard to find opinions about them from the deaf community. I'm very sorry if asking this is rude, you have every right to decline responding to this. Thank you for your time

okay finally getting to this ask

I have a really complicated opinion because on one hand I think the technology is really freeing for a lot of deaf people but on the other they are killing the deaf community.

cochlear implants in and of themselves are neutral technology. in a perfect world there would be no controversy because they would truly be neutral. unfortunately that is not this world. cochlear implants are used to rip deaf people (and in particular, deaf children) away from their community.

all deaf people have a right to the Deaf community, by being deaf they belong to our world.

when a baby is born deaf the first thing an audiologist will suggest is a cochlear implant. they give the suggestion in a way that implies, and sometimes outright states, that a cochlear implant will give the baby a "normal" childhood. they focus on how easy it will be for the people around that baby. no one will have to learn a sign language, no one will have to adapt their life to fit this deaf baby inside of it. the first problem comes in when cochlear implants are not magic devices that allows a person to be just like a hearing person. with a cochlear implant someone will still need a deaf life because cochlear implants are imperfect.

no one with a cochlear implant will ever live the exact same life as a hearing person. when a child grows up with parents who act like a cochlear implant is a perfect fix that child grows up traumatized by a world of people they cannot keep up with. that child grows up feeling like they are the problem for not having the same experience of hearing as everyone around them.

cochlear implant surgeries are serious surgeries which carry risks like meningitis. cochlear implants cannot be given to toddlers with consent. a toddler can't decide whether they want to risk the extensive number of complications because they are 9 months old (the age at which cochlear implants can be given to a child) parents are rarely informed of these risks and when they are they are told over and over again that this will give their child a "normal" life, an "easy" life. I have less of an issue with cochlear implants when it is a teenager or adult making the decision for themself. cochlear implant surgeries are optional, they are not medically necessary. why are we doing risky surgeries on unconsenting toddlers without a medical reason?

with all that said, cultural genocide is the true heart of the issue. audiologists push cochlear implants instead of sign language and connection to the Deaf community. they encourage parents not to raise their child in the community. they discourage Deaf school, they discourage connection with other deaf children, audiologists want an end to the Deaf community and Deaf culture. these children are not being raised bilingual-bicultural they are being denied their rightful place within the Deaf community. they are being damned to a life of isolation, a life of constantly falling behind, a life where they will never truly be accepted because society hates a deaf person with a cochlear implant just as much as they hate a deaf person without.

if that child ever decides later in life that they want connection with the Deaf community? they are behind. they once again cannot quite keep up. oralist childhoods created isolated deaf people, deaf people who have no home in either world.

the Deaf community may welcome second language signers but it is not the same as being a native signer. it is not the same as having the deep rooted connections with the community that are created by growing up within it.

I still respect the decision of deaf teens and adults to get cochlear implants. they are capable of making a choice for themself. deaf teens and adults often already have the social safety net of the Deaf community. I believe bi-bi upbringings for children can be beneficial though I have my own issues with giving any toddler a cochlear implant. I think that bi-bi childhoods are a good compromise and give deaf children access to both worlds. I don't have a problem with deaf children living in both worlds because they still have access to the Deaf community. I wish cochlear implants existed in a world that valued Deaf culture. I wish cochlear implants existed in a world where they were not a tool of cultural genocide. cochlear implants are not the problem, society is.

[comikadraws]

sasuke was going to genuinely plan out a genocide and it wasn't something he said in a fit of rage, right?

Was Sasuke Uchiha genocidal?

(2k words of analysis, manga screenshots, and other resources)

To refresh everybody's memory, Sasuke's plan was to destroy Konoha and everybody in it. Not that he actually did but those were his own words.

Now we can interpret this in two ways

Sasuke is blinded by rage and would, in a hypothetical scenario, act on his words (Sasuke is genocidal)

Sasuke is being dramatic and/or would get cold feet when confronted with the scenario (Sasuke is not genocidal)

In my opinion, the first scenario is far more likely to occur and the second lacks sufficient evidence to reasonably rule out that Sasuke is genocidal.

>>Analysis under the cut<<

Let's establish a few things before we begin. But feel free to skip to the next headline.

First, I will judge attempted crime as harshly as committed crime. Since this is not real life, there is no need to reward incompetence or luck. Either way, the focus of this discussion is Sasuke's intent and resolve.

Second, fictional characters don't exist in flesh and blood but as part of a narrative. This means that a character's decisions and psychology heavily depend on the author's intent.

Third, I love Sasuke's character. Do not misunderstand this as hate. This is an analysis of Sasuke's psychology and actions. He has been wronged in horrific ways and deserved better, but that won't make me sanitize his character.

Fourth, the red links are context links, linking back to my own posts. I highly recommend reading them.

The Sincerity of Sasuke's Death Threats

As per the two options I provided in the beginning, Sasuke's declaration of "destroying Konoha" must have either been sincere or not - the latter implying that Sasuke is being dramatic and/or hasn't considered the weight of his words yet, making him want to take them back. But in my opinion, that does not align with Sasuke's character.

Sasuke rarely (if at all) jokes around or speaks from a place of uncertainty or dramatics. He says he'll kill Danzo? You bet he does. He says he'll kill Itachi? He does. He says he'll kill Naruto? He tries that as well. Granted, two of these deserved to die (from Sasuke's POV) but what matters here is that Sasuke's threats are meant to be interpreted as sincerity rather than hyperbole. At the moment that Sasuke speaks them, he also means them. He is neither a liar nor a performer.

But Sasuke does go back on his words, doesn't he? During the ending, for example (although it is arguably a character inconsistency). Or during numerous other instances. Why wouldn't it be the same this time as well?

Let's take a look at a few.

One of the few other times that Sasuke takes back a threat is when he threatens to kill everybody Kakashi ever loved (chapter 177). But it is not exactly a threat - it is a hypothetical or an implied threat at best with no actual motivation or desire to drive it. Back then, Sasuke ends up reconsidering his words - though does he really?

Chapter 416 seems to be paralleling this scene. 3-4 years have passed for Sasuke to take a deep look inside himself and judge whether or not he meant those words back then and whether he means them now. And yet, he returns to the exact same logic: I will rob you of your loved ones as punishment for disapproving of my bloodlust.

After he had so much time to reconsider and reflect, Sasuke's readiness to induce harm to innocents does not appear to be spontaneous or ill-considered.

Noticeably, while Sasuke very often actually ends up executing his threats, he generally also hesitates every now and then. Like when he ends up sparing Naruto after knocking him unconscious. Or sparing Dosu because Sakura begs Sasuke to stop. How can we explain this? Perhaps Sasuke is not as committed to his words after all.

The problem is that those moments occurred at an entirely different point in Sasuke's character arc at which he is still rapidly bouncing back and forth between cruelty and mercy. While yes, Sasuke is known for hesitating on his path, this hesitance slowly but surely disappears from his decision-making later on. The cause of this change is the decay of Sasuke's morals and ensures that pre-truth reveal Sasuke and post-truth reveal Sasuke are two different people.

The Decline of Sasuke's Morals

Sasuke acts entirely differently after the truth reveal. His morals have visibly changed for the worse. Perhaps it becomes the most apparent when comparing chapter 8 to chapter 481. Whereas Genin Sasuke would once help and support his teammates if they could not keep up on their own, a teenage Sasuke disposes of them.

This kind of development first occurs as early on as chapter 56 when Sasuke decides that growing stronger (ends) justifies carrying a curse mark (means). He is on a steady moral decline afterward, first willing to sacrifice his loyalties (Orochimaru), then uninvolved bystanders (Killer B, the other Kage, other shinobi, and samurai), and finally, a friend (Karin) all in pursuit of his goals. It is utilitarian in nature.

Also, please let's not discuss the validity of killing soldiers. We have already dealt with this question during Waves Arc and later when Itachi died. From Sasuke's and other characters' POV (and as evidenced by chapter 343), dehumanizing and discarding a person just for being a soldier on the wrong side is wrong. Understood? Good.

What happened to Sasuke over time is, of course, a character arc. A corruption arc, to be specific. Let's take a quick look at some writing mechanics.

A character arc is always initiated by some sort of trigger event. If said event lies between a version A and B of a character, chances are that their sympathy, competence, or proactivity have become incomparable to each other. This is why a 13-year-old version of Sasuke (pre-truth reveal, which is his trigger event for this specific arc) does not inform us about the workings of a 17-year-old version.

Before this triggering event, Sasuke is also in the midst of a turning point in his arc, hence the indecisiveness about killing Naruto. You can view this in parallel to the Hero's Journey's "Refusal of the Call" during which Sasuke is still hesitant about the road he is taking until the triggering event makes the decision for him.

Now, back to Sasuke's morals. Personally, I believe what stands at the helm of Sasuke's corruption arc is a decrease in self-awareness and a growing lack of empathy.

There's a certain hypocrisy to Sasuke's decision-making. Sasuke is grieving a brother but then attacks somebody else's brother. He is enraged about Konoha discarding Itachi as a tool but will then proceed to abandon his own comrades (Team Taka). He condemns the genocide committed against the Uchiha but then plans a genocide of his own. Injustice is only injustice if inflicted on Sasuke but not if caused by Sasuke.

This does not compare to a younger Sasuke, who uses his own trauma to understand and connect with others and to discern right from wrong. Sasuke is capable of empathizing with Naruto because he is lonely (like himself) and Sasuke finds Orochimaru "disgusting" for viewing humans as mere tools (like a genocidal Itachi). But, over the course of his arc, his trauma instead turns into a weapon to distance himself from others.

The in-universe reason for this change is likely that Sasuke's mind is fully occupied with his own grief and rage. He is blinded by it, so much so that he no longer has the mental space to accommodate other people's pain and suffering.

There is also a narrative device to this, usually applied in the "darkest hour", such as "Batman Grabs a Gun". The purpose is to draw attention to the severity of the situation while also providing more depth to a character by giving them an underlying layer (their emotions/struggles/etc.) beneath their facade (their morals/reputation/etc.).

In Sasuke's case, this is used to highlight his grief for Itachi which is greater than any moral principle Sasuke has. Whatever allows or aids Sasuke in expressing his grief is fair game.

Intensity and Duration

So, Sasuke is definitely blinded by his rage. But is it a "fit"? I suppose that this is a matter of definition.

Sasuke's hatred for Konoha appears to be a constant. It doesn't change. It doesn't lessen. Not after a couple of hours and not after a couple of days.

To me personally, due to its duration, this is no longer a fit of rage but a mindset - one that Sasuke seems to wholeheartedly believe in.

Regardless of this, we have no indication that Sasuke's rage would lessen anytime soon. On the contrary, actually. Sasuke claims that his hatred has only grown since then.

The question we now have to ask is whether or not Sasuke would be able to rein in his rage in time to spare innocent lives. Alternatively, and combined with Sasuke's willingness to kill his own teammates, it is entirely possible that Sasuke's rage would power through, as it did for approximately 300 chapters in canon already.

The Attempts

Now, the most damning argument I have to offer is that Sasuke was already intending to make his genocide plans a reality (or take steps to do so) on three occasions. Twice during the Summit Arc and once during the War Arc.

On all three occasions, the reason why his plans don't come to fruition is because Sasuke gets sidetracked or stopped outright.

In addition, there are three other problems slowing him down. Right in chapter 416, Kisame explains that Sasuke is not strong enough to fight the entire village - even with Taka's help but even more so without them. This conflicts with Sasuke's belief that Taka likely won't approve of his genocide plans or should not be involved for other reasons (which is why Sasuke pretends in front of them). He both needs Taka and has to get rid of them.

Later on, Naruto declares that he will always be there to defend Konoha against Sasuke. My interpretation of this is that Sasuke not only honors his bond with Naruto but also recognizes that fighting Konoha and Naruto simultaneously is not strategically wise - hence he needs to defeat Naruto beforehand.

First Attempt

Sasuke takes Team Taka with him, believing them to be necessary backup. Then Obito intervenes who both threatens Sasuke and gives him the wrong impression that Konoha is "no more" - either fully eradicated or too weak to defend itself.

This might erase the need for Taka as Konoha is weakened significantly and Danzo can be targeted separately from the village.

Second Attempt

In the meantime, Sasuke kills Danzo. As explained by Kisame, a greater conflict with the entirety of Konoha is inevitable if you aim at major political leaders.

On his second attempt, he has coincidentally already managed to abandon the entirety of Team Taka, just as planned in chapter 416. But this time, before he can go to Konoha, his eyes suffer extensive damage and he instead encounters Team 7. As explained previously, Sasuke soon realizes that he cannot destroy Konoha before killing Naruto. And before that, he needs to get his eyes fixed. This results in Sasuke's withdrawal from the fight.

Third Attempt

On his third try, the one in which he decides to target Naruto first, he instead gets sidetracked by the appearance of Itachi on the battlefield.

"Sidetracked" doesn't mean "giving up" or "displaying disinterest" in a different goal. Otherwise, Sasuke's training under Orochimaru for 3-4 years would be proof of his disinterest in killing Itachi. Sasuke is simply prioritizing urgent matters and acting strategically.

Now, all of this "getting sidetracked" might sound a little convenient. But the question is "convenient for who?"

It is of course possible that Sasuke is openly searching for excuses because he doesn't truly want to eradicate Konoha, making him a harmless villain. The other explanation is that Kishimoto was the one looking for excuses.

In a conversation, @theheirofthesharingan pointed out that Sasuke is being "saved by the narrative" ie. plot armor. Though not in the sense that he is being protected from harm but rather that he is being protected from inflicting harm, probably as an extension of Konoha's own plot armor. This also ensures that Sasuke remains "redeemable" and likable to the audience so that Naruto can fulfill his goal of bringing him back to Konoha.

Conclusion

As I said in the beginning, there is a huge mountain of evidence suggesting that Sasuke not only fantasized but would've acted on his revenge plans against Konoha. This is because

We know Sasuke to be a non-dramatic character who doesn't easily back away from his own words.

Sasuke is on a corruption arc, his morals declining far enough to kill a friend. It seems unlikely that he'd draw the line at a stranger.

From a writing point of view, continuing Sasuke's corruption arc makes more logical sense unless he experiences another trigger event. It also further highlights Sasuke's pain.

Sasuke has repeated his goal multiple times over, leading me to believe that his mood wouldn't change soon enough for Sasuke to second-guess himself.

Sasuke has taken steps towards the fulfillment of his goal. It is entirely possible that, if Konoha didn't have plot armor, Sasuke would've found the right time to destroy the village eventually.

Of course, Sasuke's morals are not entirely gone, as we can see when he refuses to join Kabuto (though potentially just because Kabuto antagonizes Itachi). It is still entirely possible that Sasuke would've gotten cold feet when physically confronted with the task of killing innocent civilians. But this possibility is hardly entertained by any of the characters and Sasuke himself doesn't seem conflicted about his plans. It seems like Kishimoto intended for Sasuke to be genocidal, most evidence pointing toward this reading of his character.

I certainly have my opinions on this matter but, like always, this is a matter of interpretation.

Debating me is fine. I like to discuss my favorite characters. But screenshotting, blocking me, and then attacking me behind my back (and without having ever interacted with me) in a new post is a no-go for obvious reasons.

[iilmunchkiin]

This is in response to the anon's ask about Clover and Martlet's relationship as well as the two sides of the same coin. Explaining this in few words is going to be quite the task as there's so much to talk about when it comes to the Clover and Martlet's relationship, so I'll keep as to the point as possible.

First and foremost from the moment they meet Martlet becomes Clover's morality chain, and depending on their actions prior or after this meeting, will show other aspects of how they see each other. No other monster has this kind of affect on Clover. Likewise Clover's actions will determine how she sees humans, and what stance she should take in regards to Clover.

Clover's actions always spur Martlet into action regardless of the route. It's worth mentioning Martlet is established as being lazy, which she admits herself, but Clover's presence causes her to break out of this completely. Genocide shows her being a lot more proactive when it comes to dealing with Clover, and the other routes shows her making the extra effort to keep Clover safe, simply because this is what she feels is right. Likewise Martlet is shown to be the only monster to have some kind of influence on Clover, considering Clover will always choose her over Flowey.

In Neutral, Martlet is the sole monster that Clover cannot bring themselves to kill/refuses to kill, and all of it is completely unprompted. Likewise Martlet will also refuse to kill Clover despite their misdeeds however big or small. Even if you genuinely try to fight Martlet on Neutral, it will always end with Clover sparing her unprompted. Even on an aborted genocide route, where Clover can quite literally kill every monster they encounter including the likes of Ceroba and Starlo. They cannot bring themselves to kill Martlet, and Martlet despite seeing how dangerous Clover is, still refuses to kill them, which leads to Martlet offering to look after Clover, and Clover always accepting her offer. Plus when Martlet is killed by Flowey, Clover is so enraged they retaliate by trying to kill Flowey, and like with Clover sparing Martlet, it's completely unprompted, the player has no influence in Clover's decision to do this. To top all of this of, do Neutral enough times, and Flowey reveals to you, that Martlet convincing Clover to stay with her is a foregone conclusion without intervention. Essentially no what Clover does in Neutral, no matter who they kill, no matter what lies or manipulative tactics Flowey uses to try and control Clover, it will always end with Martlet offering to look after Clover, and Clover always choosing to stay with Martlet.

The Genocide route, is the only route were Clover and Martlet are both willing to kill the other. Not only that, during this route, Martlet is shown to be the only monster that Clover respects, and is also the only monster they spare unprompted, as well as listen to when they speak. Furthermore she's also the only monster that Clover goes out of their way to find a justifiable reason to kill, they do this for no other monster but her, which even Martlet makes a remark on. Both of them are fighting for literally the same thing, Justice for their kind, for the Injustice that was done to them. Something also very interesting about this fight that was pointed out elsewhere, both Clover and Martlet use yellow themed attacks. Martlet is also the only monster that Clover reveals their name to in Genocide.

Martlet stays by Clover's side accompanying them on three separate occasions on Pacifist with just the two of them. Four if you include the flawed Pacifist ending. The most out of any monster that Clover encounters. During these moments they get to see sides of Clover that the other characters don't really see. Likewise Clover gets to sides to her character that's different from what she usually shows others.

No matter how far gone Clover is, Martlet can always sense the good in them, when other monsters scorn them. Likewise regardless of how Clover sees monsters, as long as they don't go full vengeance they will always ultimately end up seeing Martlet in a positive light, and be drawn to her.

Martlet only tells Clover about the Syringe and the fact the she was planning to kill them using it when she senses the dark aura within them. It's also heavily implied until she came clean to them, Clover was completely oblivious to this fact, which would also imply they trusted her enough to where they didn't suspect her to be a danger to their life. It's also worth mentioning that Martlet is aware of what kind of individual Clover is even if she's not their to witness their actions, and Clover will always trust her to some capacity regardless of how their first encounter goes.

There's other stuff, but these points are some of the major ones.

[sadcoms]

AU where Rose stayed with the Time Lord Doctor after Journey’s End and they start to argue more like they did in S1 because the Doctor is doing his “I never would” thing and Rose is now saying “but sometimes you HAVE to” which causes him to start down another Davros-inspired spiral about how he’s “turned her into a weapon” and she’s like...actually travelling across dimensions trying to fight eternal darkness brought about by a ton of genocidal aliens will do that to you regardless!

Because Rose was never for pacifism-above-all-else. The episode before Dalek Harriet Jones straight up says she’s a very violent young woman because Rose (not unreasonably) wants the Slitheen to be blown up after they murdered countless people. Same with the Nestene Consciousness - but the Doctor says he has to give it a chance, and that is what she mirrors back at him in Dalek. This is usually why the pair works, because if one doesn’t have mercy on or compassion for someone the other one usually will (eg Cassandra). That’s why Ten is even willing to give Davros a chance, though it’s exacerbated by a lot of guilt around the Time War, especially when it kicked off in-part because of what he did, and failed to do, in Genesis of the Daleks.

And that is what Davros never got - that Rose had already seen the Doctor’s soul and loved him anyway; that part of their souls are the same because they helped each other grow. And it’s the same for all of the companions this era, whether it’s Jack saying he never doubted the Doctor would kill him, or Donna seeing him murder the Racnoss and still regretting not travelling with him, or Martha (somehow) forgiving the Doctor for the year that never was and for everything he burdened her with.

Because I think what Davros and the Doctor came to see as him turning people into weapons was actually just people willingly taking on the burden he carried. Again, a lot of people sort of write Tentoo and Rose off as the dalek genocide couple, but what exactly was the alternative? Let them destroy the universe? The Doctor is a coward, any day, and that makes complete sense as a reaction to already bearing two genocides on his shoulders, but it’s also that cowardice that makes other people step up and be brave, which usually means sacrificing themselves, and the Doctor carries that too. That is why Martha gets the direct parallel to the Doctor with the Osterhagen key - both are willing to burn their planets to save the rest of the universe, and Martha already spent S3 being more like the Doctor than he was because he was so broken by grief. By Season 4, the Doctor is already so self-destructive and so self-loathing that only he, the "true" Time Lord, can be the arbiter of genocides and who can’t be. Even when it comes to Martha, or to another exact replica of himself.

(Never mind that he makes essentially the same decision the Metacrisis Doctor and Martha did again in End of Time when he sends Gallifrey back into hell, but hey, he got there in the end.)

And it’s one of the reasons why the Doctor’s so reliant on the Master. I’m not sure he would have gone to get his ‘reward’ had some of that weight of destroying Gallifrey again not been shared with another Time Lord. Ten does, ultimately, put humans on a pedestal and does his best to protect them even when they are willing to share his burden (note that Tentoo destroying the Daleks means Donna doesn't have to take on any of the burdens Rose or Martha did, so she stays the least militarised companion). He simultaneously wants that other Time Lord judgement while needing humans as another perspective.

All of this to say that, I think most people understand that Ten being with someone but especially with Rose would have stopped him going Time Lord Victorious, but they don't necessarily understand why. TLV comes from his desire to save everyone, because all the loss he's seen and has caused is too much. Not only does having Rose help soothe that, but she also specifically could have helped ground the Doctor back to where he was morally in the first two series, which is quite different from where he is by S4.

(Also The Next Doctor would have been an absolutely wild story for Rose and the Doctor to have gone on next. They arrive thinking they might have a fun Christmas and then they have to confront the fact that the Battle of Canary Wharf is still following them and how when they lost each other they lost everything. And how the villain in that is defeated by the Doctor showing her herself, which is what Davros tried to do the Doctor.)

[altades]

Vashwood rant

I can't sleep so why not analyze vashwood in the middle of the night

Now, this analysis is mostly of the manga, with maybe small takes from 98 and tristamp

To start let's look at the boys from their respective beginnings

Vash is so cruelly mischaracterized as a child, and it might be a little bit of trismaps fault, even though i do love it, or maybe people are just putting characters into boxes without really thinking about it but Vash is so not soft-shy-nice little baby brother. The whole thing with him being younger is so insane to me, i get why if Nai was born like 10 minutes earlier he would make it his whole personality (very sibling thing to do) but it's just so stupid. No, they have 0 age difference and it doesn't affect their dynamic cuz the are literally twins for the love of god. And, really, when you look at the manga as kids Nai was the emotional one! And he still is!

Nai is plagued by fear and anger and resentment and those emotions are what drive his every decision. Vash, on the other hand, is much more in control of his feelings and doesn't show them as much. That is to say that pre-tesla nai is the one worried about their relationship with humans, about their future, he's the one crying after talking to Conrad (what a sweet child he was) while Vash seemes much less scared.

And when they find out about Tesla Nai is the one who faints - he’s the more reactive one, the emotional one. And that small difference is what sets their paths so differently. Because Vash actually gets a chance to talk to Rem and figure things out.And that talk is so very important because it makes Rem, who already was everything to Vash, even more important. 

Now, I want us all to think about how terrified Vash was after seeing Tesla cuz he probably thought his own mother was going to dissect him and his brother. But then she saves him when he tries to end his own life, proving that no she’s not gonna kill him, because she, as every human, has the capability to learn from her mistakes and make better choices. (too bad Nai didn’t get that lesson lol)

And then we get to the big bad things. (it’s genocide) But the important part from that whole ordeal is Rem’s sacrifice. Because, listen, I love stories where humanity is shown to be capable of change and forgiveness is a virtue and love and pussy and all that but oh man can it be so so unrealistic and a little bit insane to watch (su im looking at u (i love su but oh boy that is not how the world works unfortunately)) but Trimax manages to make it work so well. I believe that’s cuz Vash is a very kind and loving man but is also completely out of his mind and has horrendous mommy issues. At least half the reason he doesn’t kill people is because Rem has died to save them, and killing them would make it all be for nothing. If he kills these people or if he lets them die would that mean that Rem died for nothing? Did she sacrifice her life to save these people only for her own son to end their lives? AND you know I’m right cuz he literally says it in the manga but also BECAUSE HE DOES THE SAME FOR WOLFWOOD (also he did kill Nai when he had the chance but we don’t have time to unpack that)

All of that is A LOT and very complicated (i love Vash he’s so well written he’s my perfect little meow meow) now let's talk about Wolfwoooooooooood /twirls hair/

WW is much easier to understand and analyze cuz he is, just a guy,, WW is just a normal person who gets insanely unlucky and gets in THE WORST possible situations (If he ever played DND he would roll straight 1s). That is to say that his story is sort of a way to show how much life in the badlands sucks, but also that there are good things even in the worst places (the orphanage) And WW reacts to situations in the most rational way possible way - he kills to survive. he doesn’t want to but he doesn’t get a say in it. If he could chose he would just live with his family and friend and do whatever. And that, him being so normal in such a violent and bloody world is what makes him suffer all the time. His inner moral compass is screaming at him what a terrible person he is and he promptly ignores it.

That is until that moral compass manifests itself in the form of a tall, blond and handsome stranger that he’s supposed to lead to his death. The stranger who turns out to be the most compassionate and kind man WW’s has ever seen. Who he’s supposed to kill. It’s like finding an oasis in the desert and being forced to burn it to the ground. And WW doesn’t want to do that, and he refuses to believe that the oasis is not a mirage so he tries to get Vash to kill someone, even if it’s WW himself. (It doesn’t work.)

As we all know WW changes his mind because of Vash’s influence. And he dies for it. Because even though Vash’s beliefs are born of human virtues, no man is made to walk his path, for he is not human and any mortal who tries to follow an angel to the skies is doomed to crash. WHAT YOU DON’T EXPECT IS THAT THAT MAN WILL BRING THE ANGEL DOWN WITH HIM

There is this line I wrote for an art i’m planning to make and if you’ve read this far you deserve a lil spoiler - “have you found absolution in bringing an angel to his knees?” and it captures perfectly what i'm thinking. And also Vash spends so much time trying to be closer to people but I think him killing Legato might’ve been the most human thing he’s ever done. Cuz it’s is so beautiful in the way he does it for the memory of the person he loved and yet so ugly in it’s cruelty.

I’ve said this before but most of the time when there is a human/ some immortal powerful creature relationship I don’t think the human is that special but WW HE SO IS. Maybe it’s the way that he’s just as deep in the nuclear bombs with personality business as Vash is, being one of said nuclear bombs, but still remains a normal person with relatively good morals that he can anchor Vash to a sort of normality that he doesn’t get often. Like what other guy would get hunted by all sorts of freaks with you, get in trouble all the time, get shot and etc and etc and then go for a drink with you like it’s a normal wednesday? Wolfwood. Or maybe it's that WW learns of every worst part of Vash, he sees him be on the brink of losing himself, he knows Vash has actually caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people and ALMOST did it again after Julai, and still stays with him? He sees Vash become something that is not human at all and still stay? Idk MAYBE IT’S ALL OF THAT but WW is just so important and so down bad but we all know that already so i’m not gonna add to that

Anyways, I got this all out of my system gn

[le-panda-chocovore]

I think the reason for all that discourse in the JJK fandom is that we had some expectations about what this story would be about, and we were wrong. I'd say it was our fault for having them, because Gege had his own story in mind and it isn't our role to tell him what to write/draw. But I'd also say that we were misled into having those expectations and then being deceived, because shock value is fun.

(I'm not in the AOT fandom so maybe I'm 100% wrong, in which case don't pay attention to me. I'm just rambling I'm not trying to make a point)

See there's not such a thing in Attack On Titans. I mean I know people are arguing whether a decision was good or bad or a character development was positive or negative, but no one is rioting the way JJK readers are even when someone dies, kills, or does worse (they do start a genocide lol). Because in AOT you know since the beginning what this story is about : surviving, war, and liberty. With time you learn that it's also about racism, destiny and injustice. But the story starts with death and blood and it never calms down, characters keep dying or getting hurt and no one's safe all along the story. So you just know it'd end the same way, you know what to expect, that power of friendship won't save anyone here.

But Jujutsu Kaisen is different, because it has all the codes of a basic Shonen. Everyone was comparing it to Naruto during the 1st season so you would believe it'd follow the same path. Of course there's fights and fails and suffering and death, because it's necessary for the growth of the protagonist. He'd learn he's not strong enough and he'd try harder and mature more and be better. Jujutsu Kaisen makes you think it's your One Piece-type manga where 1 person dies every 4 arcs and the main team survives everything, even when it looks impossible.

And then Shibuya happens and you're shocked because it's way to early to kill so many valuable characters in a row. Usually that kind of massacre happens during Big War arcs like in MHA. At first you think it's an interesting writing choice because it changes from other mangas, and you wonder how the main character will evolve from that. But then the training arc never happens, because shit keeps falling on them and there's a pile of deads and you start to wonder when it'd stop. Spoilers : it doesn't.

So at some point you realize it. This isn't a classical shonen. This isn't an happy-ending after a hard fight kind of story. There's no power of friendship to save them, there's no important moral path to keep following no matter what (like "I won't do to you what you did to me because it'd mean that I'm the same" no it doesn't work here), and there's not even a chance to run away from that cursed role no one wants to bear. There's no one protecting the kids anymore. The MC isn't strong enough and the mentors are dead and close friends are off-fight and the one person able to end this has to make the horrendous choice to give up his humanity.

In AOT, you were shocked, but it felt logical in the sense of where the story was leading you from the beginning. In JJK, you feel betrayed and manipulated because everything made you think about those other mangas where people ended up fine, but it was just a cover.

Honestly you COULD have guessed it'd end that way. Many people did. You just ignored it.

You thought Junpei's death was an exception, the Major Point for Yuuji's development, the Shock Value Kill to put some depth nuance in the story. But in reality it was a warning, a taste of the future. There WERE signs after all, and Gege never pretended to write another Naruto. You were so used to the classical shonen that you read the signs and fell for the trick.

JJK has never been a nice story from the beginning, Sukuna was at the center of every event since the beginning. You can dislike what is happening but you cannot say it's bad, as in a scenaristic choice. Gege is a writing genius and unfortunately he's also pure evil.

You shouldn't have trusted a one-eyed cat after all.

[mesetacadre]

On Spain, Palestine, and socialdemocracy

I'm sorry to my spanish-speaking friends but this post is mostly meant for the various people who aren't that familiar with Spanish politics so they fully understand the context of Spain's recognition of Palestine, so it'll be written in English instead of Spanish.

Ever since the Spanish government decided to recognize Palestine, amongst other events, I've seen many friends celebrating. This is normal, of course, but the over-enthusiasm makes me think some of you are lacking context.

First, the arms trade. At least since 1995, Spain has sold arms, munitions, explosives, and vehicles to Israel, according to the government's own sources. The total value of arms and munitions exports since 1995 amounts to 36,616,066.21€ ($39,730,901) and 800,417.6kg (1,764,616.6 pounds). The total of "airships and spatial vehicles" amounts to 233,622,074.13€ ($253,495,704.46). Officials have repeatedly stated that, since Oct 7 2023, there have been no arms sales to Israel. However, in November of 2023, this website shows an arms export worth 987,000€ ($1,070,961.56) in the subcategory of "bombs, grenades, torpedoes, missiles". In December of 2023 there is another export with the same category as the last one worth 125,240€ ($135,893.85). The government has stated that the November export was made up of "medium caliber munitions without explosives" (which is weird that it was classified under bombs, grenades, torpedoes and missiles but whatever) and that it had already been agreed upon before Oct 7th. I'm sure that the Palestinians appreciate the munitions they are being killed with do not explode, and that the 552kg (1,216.95 pounds) of "gunpowder and explosives" exported in 2023 will also go very well with those non-explosive munitions. And, regardless, we all know that the Palestinian genocide did not start last October. This is also just the publicly available data, but I think we can trust them to be honest :)

For some context on the political situation. In July of 2023 we had general elections in which a coalition government was formed. The biggest party in this coalition is the PSOE, the president's (Pedro Sánchez) party, a socialdemocratic party that has governed on-and-off since the establishment of the current liberal democracy in 1978, this will be important later. The other member of this coalition is Sumar, a further-left socialdemocratic party that is itself a broader coalition of almost all parliamentarty "leftist" groups, such as IU (United Left) and the PCE (Spanish Communist Party, don't get too caught up on the name because their eurocommunist turn in the 60s has rendered then just another socdem party). The election was very closed and the coalition was almost not formed, and in the end PSOE had to reach an agreement with the pro-Catalan independence parties. All of this means that it has been a weak government without much cohesion, which in turns means every member of the coalition has been doing everything they can to reinforce their position. One example of this was Pedro Sánchez's letter contemplating resigning because of the verbal attacks he and his wife had been recueveing from the opposition. That letter forced every entity in the parliamentary and even some in the extra-parliamentary left to express support for Sánchez, and after announcing he would not be resigning, polling shows support for his government increased, though this is disputed by some and I'm suspicious of it myself.

Anyhow, this is important because the parties that make up the government are being very conscious about their support, more than usual. The decision to finally recognize Palestine (and I'm not even getting into the Palestinian National Authority, which is what they're actually recognizing) comes in this context of insecurity regarding their support, and comes after weeks of encampments and other protests in universities across the entire country. The continued arms exports, the delay in taking the decision and the context of the decision makes it quite obviously an opportunistic move to garner support. But is the recognition actually meaningful for Palestinians suffering a genocide? Barely. It might pave the way for Palestine's inclusion in the UN (the US will veto anyway) (and it's not like the UN can do more than stern condemnations). What does not change is the continuous arms exports since at least when export data was first published, and the commercial relations the government and Spanish monopolies have with Israel, all of which allow Israel to carry out genocide. And even if Spain had never sold even a grain of gunpowder to Israel, and even if no economic relations had ever been established, Spain is an important member of NATO and the EU.

A few days ago it was 43 years since Spain officially joined NATO in 1982 without a referendum, since polling showed only 18% supported joining NATO, and 52% outright opposed it. It was only 4 years later, in 1986, when PSOE carried out a referendum on remaining in NATO (note: the PSOE had gone from fully opposing NATO membership when they were in the opposition to defending it after winning the elections). The question was "Do you consider Spain remaining in the Atlantic Alliance under the terms agreed upon by the Nation's Government to be convenient". This question did not actually say "NATO" (OTAN in Spanish) and it did not make clear what people were actually voting on. 52.24% voted yes. One of the unwritten prerequisites for joining the EU in 1985 was to also be a member of NATO.

NATO is an imperialist alliance that has always defended the continuity of Israel, and its member states have always supplied it with the resources necessary to displace, opress, and kill the Palestinian people. The economic benefits of this fact permeates the economy of every NATO member state. The same goes for the EU, which is one of the most significant trade partners of Israel. And the increase of intensity in the genocide Israel commits is happening parallel to the EU's turn towards a military economy. For example, the European Stability Mechanism, founded in 2011, has given the EU member states 400,000,000,000€ ($434,059,923,120) to invest in the "defense" industry and the "green transition". The European Commissioner Thierry Breton said in early April of this year that "we need to change the paradigm and transition to the mode of war production", amongst other warmongering statements by European leaders. Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands and Germany have already expanded military service. This is all, of course, driven by the interimperialist war in Ukraine, but the investment in the war industry will undoubtedly continue to fuel Israel's occupation.

There is no group within the Spanish parliament (and very few outside the parliament) that even begins to question NATO and EU membership. The government can get away with this apparent pro-Palestine (more like two-state solution but that's beyond the point) posturing because regardless of Spain's own exports and positions, its membership in NATO and the EU will be the most relevant factor in its ties with Israel. Recognition of a nation as a "legitimate" country does not have a material effect on the Palestinians' situation, and the unquestioned participation in these imperialist alliances does. PSOE's slogan for next week's European elections is "More Europe". Do not let empty actions distract you from the real facts of Spain's unbroken complicitness in this genocide

[matan4il]

Daily update post:

Another independent Palestinian terrorist attack happened today, wounding two Palestinians who happened to drive by the terrorists, who intended to shoot at Israeli soldiers. The IDF neutralized them, while one soldier's life was saved thanks to his gear (I found the report on the shooting terrorist attack in both Hebrew and English, I only found the info on the two wounded Palestinians in Hebrew).

During the International Court of Justice's decision regarding provisional measures against Israel, only the majority opinion was read out loud. The minority opinion was published separately. The short of it is that the judge from Uganda found that South Africa didn't have a right to make this case at all, and therefore decided against every single provisional measure SA asked for, while the Israeli judge had the same conclusion, and a few words to add, as a child survivor of the Holocaust. He wrote, among other things, "Genocide is not just a word to me" (a sentiment that should be shared by everyone, not just survivors of genocide, IMO) and that essentially, the ICJ became a stage to put Able on trial for having been murdered by Cain, or in Barak's words, by focusing on Israel instead of on Hamas, South Africa "wrongly sought to impute the crime of Cain to Abel."

This footage aired a few days ago, but since I couldn't find it anywhere in English, I ended up editing it out of an article in Hebrew. What you can see here are two things... First, you'll see the Israeli Air Force following a Hamas squad, where the terrorists are carrying RPGs and going into a building. The IAF then strikes from the air that building, and what really stands out is the secondary explosions after the initial hit, indicating that the building was full of explosives. Second, you'll see Gazans evacuating to safety. As they do, they chant against Hamas. But what really got to me is how they're moving slowly next to Israeli tanks. If they were scared that the Israeli army would shoot at them indiscrimintaely as part of some attempted genocide, they would be rushing it out of there, and likely they wouldn't have even stepped anywhere near the tanks. They can walk slowly next to the IDF, because they're sure that the Israeli soldiers are NOT going to fire at them.

In the last couple of days, we've had repeated reports of Israelis being injured by Hezbollah fire into northern Israel (after civilian communities were continuously targeted, and people got killed by this Iran-funded terrorist group), and that IDF units which have concluded their fighting in Gaza, are now starting to train for a possible war in the north. Let's hope it won't come to that, but the only thing that might stop that option is a diplomatic agreement leading to Hezbollah leaving Israel's border, and there are no signs of those efforts succeeding for the time being.

The final warning before a subponea that the House committee investigating antisemitism had to issue Harvard, because the university hasn't produced the documents it was asked to, sure does make it sound like Haravard has nothing to hide...

Today, 4 months and a day after the Hamas massacre, they started removing the ruins of houses in kibbutz Be'eri, where over 100 members of the small, agricultural community had been slaughtered on Oct 7. This is a first step in re-building the kibbutz.

And this is one of the kibbutz members, Meni Goddard.

In continuation of yesterday's info on the number of Israelis already murdered by Hamas, and their bodies held hostage, today it was confirmed that Meni was murdered on Oct 7, and his body was kidnapped to Gaza. It was already known that his wife Ayelet was also murdered during the massacre. Kibbutz Be'eri currently has 11 members who are known to have been kidnapped to Gaza, of which 6 are bodies held hostage, depriving the dead of their right for decent burial, and their families and community of closure. May his memory be a blessing.

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

[wispforever]

Some thoughts on Itachi

So, I've seen a lot of comments circulating about my tags on this post, and I'm intrigued at the interest. I didn't expect it, as I see much more pigeonholing of Itachi's character than honest to god analysis. No hate- I'm no stranger to Kishimoto's writing. Some of his characters were unfortunately butchered or never given the chance to be developed properly, and Itachi is most certainly no exception. That said, I like to grant him a bit more nuance than I see on most blogs. I think people get a little wrapped up in the supposed "moral implications" of exploring how Itachi was also a victim of the system, as well as someone who victimized many people. But it's silly to equate character analysis and context consideration with condoning genocide.

I have a good laugh every once and a while at the metaphorical gymnastics people do in order to stay in the good graces of a bunch of internet trolls who are just Waiting for any opportunity to tell you you love murder and think it's delicious just because you made a post exploring a character's background. Media is grey; it's layered and wonderfully complex. There are many wrongs and rights in every story, and many wrongs and rights within those wrongs and rights. That's what I love about Naruto. Often times it's really too much like real life. Instead of people being black and white, right or wrong, bad or good- they're usually in a tough situation, trying their best and falling short, don't have all of the information, acting with good intentions or acting on what they believe will bring about a lesser evil, and then end up hurting others.

But it is much easier to assign blame and move on. A so-called bad person will always be the perfect scapegoat for issues bigger than them. In Itachi's case, the fascist government in the Leaf. It's easier to say Itachi could have just refused and decided not to be involved, than to recognize that like almost every other character in the narrative, he was under extreme duress, living in a military state. He was a child whose existence, along with all the other children and adults in the Leaf, was only valuable as long as he could serve as a tool for the war machine in the shinobi world's fucked up political system. And saying this is not the same as saying he was not capable of better decisions or that everything that he did thereafter or in general should not be read critically or subject to hypothetical consequences. It is the same as a saying his actions cannot be fully understood without complete context, and the themes of Naruto will never come through if every villain is just "evil" with no further nuance. And it would be boring too LOL

That said, I love to think about Itachi's situation back then. The ages in Naruto are a bit muddled, a little inconsistent, subject to change and interpretation, but Itachi was a child when he murdered everyone in the Uchiha compound. Most sources say he was 13. It should go without saying that someone so young isn't capable of the same decision-making or critical thinking as say, a 30-year-old, someone whose brain is finished developing and has much more experience on Earth.

Itachi's experience at this point in his life is informed by his age, and it's obviously informed by his childhood, as he has no other place from which to draw conclusions. Itachi grew up in a warring state. He saw people die and was subject to extreme violence in his formative years. To make matters worse, he was taught that war was inevitable and the only thing he could do to guard against it was kill others before they got the chance to kill him (threaten the village). Thusly, Itachi internalized at a very young age that what was in his power was to minimize damage (to himself, to his village, and to the world). What was not in his power was to stop this violence entirely (by adopting a critical mindset and going against fascist powers).

A part of this I think people often forget is that Itachi has absolutely nowhere to adopt this mindset FROM, as even though his father and the other members of the Uchiha clan seek equity in the Leaf, if they were to overthrow the Hokage and create a new system, it would still presumably center around the same ideals (minus, of course, the oppression of the Uchiha as a group). Fugaku is the head of the Uchiha clan at this time. As someone who imposed near impossible performance-related expectations on both of his sons, and withheld love and affection whenever they came up short (so often that it was at the cost of having any considerable emotional bond with either of them), there is absolutely no good reason to believe that Fugaku would reform the Leaf using a non-fascist ideology. And if he did, there is no good reason to believe that he would be some kind of visionary LMAO

This is important to remember because when it comes down to Itachi's decision to either kill everyone in the Uchiha compound and his family, or be part of the coup that would overthrow the Leaf, some people treat it as though it's a choice between fascism and non-fascism, which it most certainly is not. And if it was, Itachi, as a child who had grown up immersed in this ideology, would not be able to appreciate the difference. This context allows us to understand further what Itachi was really weighing in that moment. Accounting for his young age and limited worldview, the only valuable difference in this moment to Itachi was the amount of bloodshed that he would "allow" to happen. Essentially, he sees the options as follows:

Either give in to Danzo and kill everyone in the Uchiha compound, or facilitate a coup where the current government is (hopefully) overthrown and risk starting another war.

Here, Itachi pauses. He has known war. He knows how it affects children, adults, families, and whole nations. The peace he's living in currently is bought with blood, but it's the only peace he's ever known. The alternative is horrifying. And a war in this context, Itachi likely thinks, would be his fault, as he has now been put in the position to "prevent" it. Danzo and the whole shinobi system have groomed him into thinking so. Itachi, at age 13, cannot understand that there would be no war; it exists only as leverage for Danzo's argument at this point. His sensitivities are being played on.

Fugaku, though he is not the same as Danzo, offers about as much help as he does (that being none). Fugaku has no interest in avoiding war; if a war breaks out, it's justified because it will still mean his clan will no longer be living in oppression. This idea is valid, as fascist systems and discrimination can only cease to exist when we rise up against them; unfortunately, this most often calls for righteous violence, as the oppressive powers will not be moved with peaceful shows (not to mention they are willing to go to extreme lengths to avoid losing their hold on the people they have crushing power over, i.e. the Uchiha massacre). But Fugaku has no words to explain this to Itachi, who fears the worst and further fears being responsible for the worst. All he does is act as if it's a moral failing that his 13-year-old son is unwilling to stage a coup, which he believes could mark the abrupt end of a peace that's only just begun.

That said, let it be known that Itachi does appreciate this situation with SOME nuance, though it isn't of the kind that might have enabled him to see he was being manipulated. He at the very least understands that Danzo is a warmonger and oppresses those he fears (the Uchiha). He understands that the rights of his clan have been sorely disrespected, and that the issue needs correction. He understands the anger of his friends and family. This is why it takes him much deliberation before he can even come close to making a decision. He plays both sides right up until the end, listening to Danzo, as well as Fugaku and Shisui, paying attention to the current atmosphere in the Leaf as he tries to decide.

It is something he doesn't want to do. Here's where I get to the part I put in the tags of my drawing.

In this situation, it's almost worthless to write an analysis about Itachi's feelings at this time, his understanding of what was actually going on, his loyalty to his clan or his loyalty to the Leaf, because really, he could not grasp it. He was never prepared for this. He never knew he would be asked to make a decision he could only understand as "your family or the world?"

Itachi was put in a position that had no happy ending. There was no decision he could make that would not hurt. That could not result in a cataclysm that split him right down the middle. There was no version of this story that a 13-year-old could carry out thinking "I have done the right thing."

And that's the important part. Both sides asked him to make this decision, and so both sides are guilty of placing an immeasurable pressure on a child who should never have been put in such a position. Regardless of ideology, regardless of price, regardless of oppression or loyalty or devotion or any other thing- someone else should have made this decision for Itachi. Someone else should have been responsible. An adult, at the very least. Someone who COULD understand the implications of both options. Someone who COULD go forward and appreciate the evil of fascism and know that a coup was necessary. Itachi was never capable of such a thing. If he made the "wrong" decision, than every child who can't explain to you what a fascist government in a military state looks like and explain what the difference is between a hate crime and resisting a hateful power, is also wrong. Here is the nuance. These are things a 13-year-old in this universe cannot be expected to understand unless they are taught. And Itachi had no teacher. Quite the opposite. There were only forces pressing him from both sides, saying "choose."

Had his father done this for him, had Shisui been in this position, had any other adult Uchiha acting as a spy been put to this task, it would be a much different narrative. But of course, it had to be Itachi, who Danzo knew he could manipulate. It had to be a child, someone skilled enough to do the job, but inexperienced enough, afraid enough, to be willing to sacrifice everything they had to see the mission through. Someone you could whisper "greater good" to and have them hand over their well being on a plate. Someone who didn't understand they had the power and strength to destroy the system threatening them.

On a narrative level, Itachi exists to illustrate this point. How young people are systematically indoctrinated to serve a greater purpose, be it under a specific government, religion, or otherwise. We see it in real life fascism, in real life cults. There's no mistake. It isn't an accident that Itachi's story begins like this.

Which brings me to the rest of his life. The reason I drew the picture in the post referenced at the top. Itachi's character is a bit of a mystery the rest of the anime. Be that because of bad writing or an intentional omission, his motives, thoughts, and opinions are largely left ambiguous. However, there are still a few moments that interest me as far as the implications of his development.

When Itachi first comes back to the Leaf village, he faces Kakashi. On the one hand, this could simply be a narrative tool- the big bad meets the big good. He takes Kakashi out of commission! The first rogue shinobi we see who is able to defeat the pillar of the Leaf, the Copy Ninja, and without even breaking a sweat!

On the other hand, I find the brutality of Itachi's attack very intriguing. Again, it could be the tough guy act, but he's able to keep three jonin busy easily using standard genjutsu (with the help of Kisame). It wouldn't be a stretch to say that using the tsukuyomi is overkill, and at a considerable price, we learn later.

Why then would Itachi, who has been shown to have excellent battle intelligence, who is strategic to a fault, be willing to jeopardize his health among other things just to... scare the Leaf? Make sure Kakashi wouldn't be a nuisance in the future? Sure, the last one would make collecting Naruto less complicated, but they dispatched Kakashi easily enough, and surely Jiraiya, who Naruto was with at the time, would pose a bigger problem than Kakashi.

It doesn't make strategic sense, which makes me wonder if Itachi has a special animosity toward Kakashi. Being his superior in the ANBU before the Uchiha massacre, someone who was willing to conduct surveillance of the Uchiha compound without question, Kakashi could have become a symbol of the indifference of the Leaf for Itachi. He could very well have been a reminder of the inoperable position Itachi was put in when he was still a child, and Kakashi, of course, was an adult. Another adult who did nothing. Noticed nothing. Did not help Itachi.

And while I'm certain that Kakashi would have taken severe issue with the goings on in the Leaf at that time, judging by his reaction when he finds out the truth in Shippuden, Itachi knows him only by what he did then. Facilitated surveillance of the Uchiha compound, was a supportive superior, but nothing greater. A bystander whose compassion, while well meaning, was entirely unhelpful.

I don't think it's far fetched that Itachi fucking crucified Kakashi because he was so angry at what being in the Leaf did to him. At some point, as he got older, he realized how terrible it was. He realized there were people like him. Children who were "born killers". Pawns in the game of the shinobi powers.

After leaving the village, Itachi joins the Akatsuki, who are also seeking peace through war (another story). He is supposed to spy for them, but doesn't follow through in any enthusiastic way (that we're shown). He works alone for quite some time, or else with a group (briefly he was shown with Conan and Kakuzu). He is partners with Orochimaru before he's expelled from the Akatsuki. He is partners with one of the Seven Swordsmen of the Mist. He grows up and meets many people, sees lots of stories unfold. He learns that he isn't in a minority. Many shinobi are just like him.

And then, as an adult, he is partnered with Kisame, who he finds excellent camaraderie with because of their similar backgrounds. We see in this relationship that he understands what happened to him and what he did enough to acknowledge that, while neither of them are monsters, as many people say, they are human. And humans make mistakes. Humans are complicated. Wrong and right and wrong and right. They understand each other, and Itachi understands more clearly what the world puts these children up to. What it forces shinobi to become. That it isn't all his fault, but he still did it. And so he is responsible. He appears to be able to live with that.

But when he returns to the Leaf, those feelings bubble up. He hates the Leaf. He hates that system. He hates what he did. Maybe he even hates being a shinobi, how his excellence was weaponized, how being an Uchiha doomed him and his clan. And for what?

Itachi is played as a character who is only sensible, only logical, only interested in practical things, has nothing to express. But the way he behaves toward Kakashi in that moment bares all his grief and anger. I just like to think about it. We have so few moments where we get to see Itachi genuinely. The fight with Kakashi, the Sasuke/Deidara fight, his thoughtful moments with Kisame. Just makes me wonder what could've been if Itachi's story had gone a little differently.

Anyway, if anyone would like me to expand on any points or has additional thoughts, feel free to hop in my ask box or leave a comment. Thanks for the interest, I love to talk.

[melissa-titanium]

HELLOOO CAN I TALK TO YOU ABT DOLL

do you think that like, her being at school let her have some escape from her home and her revenge plans, like in this picture she is smiling and it looks way more like a happy smile than here

SHE IS HAPPY TO GET HER REVENGE, BUT SHE LOOKS SO TIRED, EVEN HER LAUGH IS TIRED

its like shes getting worse from the kills, in her house there was enough oil for her to not kill any other drones, yet her plan had to work, but it didnt, and only let her feeling more guilty

EVERYONE IS ALLOWED TO SEND ME SHIT ABOUT DOLL ALWAYS AT ANY TIME EVER FOREVER AND EVER. I LITERALLY NEED HER. SHES SO FUCKING COOL. BUT OMG HI YES HOLD ON

thats such an interesting take on pilot doll omg HI???? YES I CAN TOTALLY SEE THIS CONSIDERING WE DONT SEE DOLL IN SCHOOL OUTSIDE OF THE PILOT. HIIII YES OMG ok ok.

i havent actually thought this much about this. i personally think her in the pilot vs her in promening was like. not really a Whole big difference but like...the fact that lizzy now has access to v set her off. shes always been a little unsettling, a little fucking deranged but maybe something happened between ep 1 and 3 thatr was like. lizzy came to her like... hey, one of the disassembly drones came by my bunk the other day. was this the one? (shows doll a pic) and doll just FUcking Loses it . i think she was actively vengeful during the pilot too but YES like ur saying its almost a .grounding thing. everyone here is real and alive. and then at the end of the day she has to go back and face dozens upon dozens upon dozens of corpses that are there because of HER and its liike. idk i imagine shes 18-22 . shes young as hell. and that FUCKS WITH YOU. this is doll to me:

they know damn well her parents are dead but she's just under being eerie enough that no one really suspects her for anything going on. she's relatively normal around lizzy & not aggressive but not outgoing with other students. like to everyone, shes just a normal kid who lost her parents. plenty of kids have lost their parents, considering the murder drones lurking *right outside the bunker.*

i think she would get tired. yeah. she held onto the all consuming debilitating hatred for these genocidal war machines that killed her parents and countless others. then heartbeat happens, and suddenly people are Okay with them??? that would fucking set her OFF. so long, so fucking long shes been holding onto her anger and not being able to do anything about it . BUT NOW SHE CAN. ough ok but then theres those conflicting feelings bcos of uzi. u can see in promening she has SOME sense of... for lack of a better word, humanity in how she treats uzi (hell even tossing lizzy out of the way when she started killing people.) i think she picks and choses who she cares about and then is usually consistent in how she treats them. basically; dont get on her bad side. she's conflicted at the end of ep3 after learning uzi has the solver; but uzi is siding with the murder drones and thats HER loss for being SCHTUPIDDDDDDDD!!!! but then again, she finally has someone who understands what shes going through... but also AUGH..! i have to kill v i HAVE to kill v ive gotten so far i cant give up now FUCK!!!! FUCK!!!!!!!!!!!! i think there would be so much of her being conflicted between uzi knows what i feel. but also uzi is siding with the bitch who killed my fucking parents. i think she would just spiral and spiral until dead end comes along and she has a decision to make. and she makes it. and uzi is Fucked and v is Fucked and n and tessa are FUCKEd AND OK TYHIS IS GETTING LONG IM DONE

doll jumpscare

[theheirofthesharingan]

Came across a rather unhinged take on Itachi and Sasuke the other day and I had to write about this because it's a widely accepted opinion in the Sasuke fandom. Although this post is not targeted towards any individual, but if anyone sees this and wants to take credit and feel offended, you're welcome to do that. This is going to be a long and penal-heavy post (kind of), so brace yourselves. And read it at your own risk. xD

A most common sentiment among Sasuke fans is that if he had the chance, he would rather fight for the clan than protect Itachi, because Sasuke is not "stupid" like Itachi and would never kill his own parents. And if he had the chance to go back, he would kill the "Konoha bootlicker Itachi along with Danzo and Hiruzen" because he's not stupid.

So, you're telling me that Sasuke, upon learning the truth, more powerful, more mature, with more support from his peers would not make the decisions that Itachi at the age of 12 surrounded by shitty people did. Aren't you a little intellectual for having an opinion like this? Because absolutely it was his fault he had terrible parents, his best friend committed suicide right in front of him, and two old geezers took advantage of his naive philosophy, which hardly had any time to mature because he was considered too mature for his age — mature enough to handle things in his parents' absence as seen from Itachi looking after Sasuke the night of the Kyuubi attack.

Wilder is that the people who talk shit about Itachi for killing his clan members cheer and support Sasuke's genocidal goals. Because for sure, that totally didn't mean what happened to Sasuke would definitely happen to other people as well and that too at Sasuke's hands. And once he came to his senses he would have nothing but regrets.

"But he didn't actually do it."

I wonder why...

Oh.

Apparently, Itachi, after dying, magically, manipulated Sasuke into becoming Konoha bootlicker too. :( What the hell, Itachi? How could you do this?

I always find it amusing when these people try to trivialize Itachi and his love for Sasuke along with Sasuke's love for him, because he "was fighting for the justice of his clan, so he would never acknowledge Itachi's sufferings and it's just Itachi fans making the shit up to justify him" and "All that Itachi did was unforgivable so Sasuke is just delusional to see him as a good guy."

Is that it, though? Because, when Sasuke confronts Itachi during their battle, he does question him.

But once he learns Itachi's truth he ends up taking a different path.

He's in Obito's lab. The same lab where he's kept the eyeballs he stole after massacring his clan.

Confronting Team 7, his first thought is still Itachi, then his parents, then his clan. Does he think the massacre was right? Nope. But unlike most of his fans, he's angry at the right people. He understands Itachi was a victim of the same system he is. In fact, only he understands Itachi is also a victim, because the system doesn't consider Itachi any victim, and Itachi himself doesn't view himself as one either.

If he had to sacrifice the whole world for his brother, he would do it in a heartbeat. He was willing to do it, for Itachi and Itachi alone.

When he meets Itachi again during the war, he is hurt and angry, but his concern is still Itachi. They made you suffer. I'm going to destroy them because they made you go through so much pain. He's reminiscing what Obito said about Itachi.

and

When he's speaking to Itachi, he again says he's going to destroy the village for causing him so much pain.

He thinks his brother is perfect.

He's stabbed by Madara. But all he thinks about is not dying because of Itachi. He was close to dying twice in the story, and both the times he had Itachi as the last thought.

He wanted to live because of Itachi. So he could create the world where no other Itachi was ever sacrificed.

At every occasion he's weighing Itachi over anyone and everyone else. That, to be brutally honest, includes his clan and his parents.

He's still (rightfully) angry at the village and sympathizes with his clan. But he understands people like Danzo and Obito were the ones responsible for the pain Itachi and his family went through.

Furthermore.. Sasuke to Itachi haters:

It must be hard being a Sasuke fan who despises Itachi because these folks have to create lies and mythology, ignore the existing canon for their headcanons and fanfictions they create in their heads and blame the author for being a "terrible writer" because, of course, the man who wrote these characters had no idea what he was writing anyway. :)

Sasuke would absolutely sacrifice the whole world for Itachi as would Itachi for him. They loved each other the most and there's no denying that.