#buddy i was a leftist this WHOLE TIME

[communistkenobi]

what are some of your favorite nonfiction podcasts?

the big one I recommend is just king things - two marxist academics go through the books of Stephen King in publication order. extremely funny and insightful podcast, very accessible (like this is not a theory podcast or anything, it’s very laid back and casual), and I really appreciate their approach to literary criticism.

game studies study buddies is by the same hosts as just king things but this is a theory podcast. Each episode they go over and discuss a book from the field of game studies (ie the academic study of games). I very much recommend you listen to this if you want to like passively absorb critical/leftist theory. The hosts are academics, one of which teaches about games regularly as a professor, so it kind of feels like someone is teaching you about a text. I find it fairly accessible, I learn a lot about games, and as I said they very frequently structure their discussions with left wing theory. I find them very insightful!

blowback is very good, it’s about the imperial history of the United States. a history/journalist type podcast. this can get extremely heavy and difficult to listen to given the subject matter so I would not binge this (I usually listen to it when I’m doing a physical activity) but it’s a really good source of historical information and has helped me develop my political understanding of modern western imperial history. each season covers a different event: S1 is the invasion of Iraq, S2 is the Cuban Revolution, S3 is the Korean War, S4 is the invasion of Afghanistan

ALAB (all lawyers are bad) is good with some caveats. It’s a podcast by a bunch of lawyers who spend a lot of time on twitter discussing how horrible lawyers are, usually either focusing on specific high-profile lawyers (Kavanaugh, Dershowitz), specific american legal regimes (anti-BDS legislation, sanction law, etc), or specific trends in the legal system that causes structural problems (eg lifetime judgeship appointments with no mandatory retirement age). They also sometimes do random funny lawsuits or cover legal responses to events like Jan 6th. A mixed bag in terms of focus but mostly it’s hating on American law and the legal system. This is a critical recommendation because it’s a bunch of lawyers dudes riffing and some of their analysis can be stupid/bad, they say stupid shit that comes off as “anti identity politics” at times, etc. I’m pulling from memory because it’s been a while since I listened to them so I’m sorry if this is overly vague/general. The best way to describe it is chapo-adjacent if that means anything to you lol

and finally the podcast knowledge fight. this is a podcast dedicated to covering and debunking Alex Jones. in all honesty I don’t find this podcast super valuable in terms of analysis, like they are only really focused on debunking the claims Jones makes and explaining why they’re factually wrong. Which like that’s a good thing to do, I’m not saying its bad, but I don’t really need to be convinced Jones is lying about everything lol so I don’t personally find it super useful/insightful. If you have to interact with Alex Jones fans regularly (like family members) then maybe that will be more valuable for you! Totally depends. however the reason I bring them up is because I DO recommend the series of episodes they have titled formulaic objections - in this series they go through all the deposition material from the sandy hook lawsuit against Alex Jones (the one that cost him a billion dollars in damages and court sanctions lol). They play clips of the depositions throughout these episodes, which are so fucking insane to listen to. Like listening to a bunch of employees of an insane fringe right wing media organisation being questioned by lawyers for hours on end is so entertaining lmao. This lawsuit is about the sandy hook school shooting so a warning about the subject matter, it can get dark at times, but on the whole it’s extremely fucking funny to listen to. And the hosts provide a lot of context for what’s going on in the lawsuit, talk about it, and also they debunk the shit Jones lies about in court that you may not know about, so I find that part of it really good.

[honey-crypt]

Hello! This is not a writing ask actually Its a question. Can you feed us with info about your Oc Benny?

I made the same ask to @fuerrziah and I wanted to ask you as well (I am coming for the Elliott squad >:) )

Here are the questions ^^ You don’t have to answer all of them you can just pick and answer ^^

eeeee i love this ask!!! tysm for asking this, i def need it to help develop benny more :3 i’m gonna try to answer as many questions as possible

5) exactly thirty three minutes. benny did so as a fun challenge for themselves and ended up having to get up because his legs and pelvis started to ache

6) benny laughs pretty easily! he uses humor as a coping mechanism and you can’t be sad if you’re laughing! at least, that’s what they think

8) it’s very hard to earn benny’s trust. they grew up getting harassed and bullied for being half-solennian (see here for context) so they learned to be on guard with new people. benny doesn’t actually trust many people; sure, he can buddy buddy with many people but trusting them is a whole other story. it’s very easy for benny to lose trust in people, especially if they find out he’s half-solennian and react negatively to it

9) the laws are flexible. benny has a degree in sociology and knows that laws are social constructs set up by the ruling class (leftist benny moment). he believes that you can’t apply a “one size fits all” mentality to the law, there has to be flexibility and there is flexibility, such as leniency for homicide in cases of self defense. he’s also not afraid to steal some shit from joja mart as a means to “stick it to the man” (morris has yet to catch them)

11) benny was told to stop being so reckless as a child. they weren’t diagnosed with bertolotti’s syndrome at the time but the doctors did confirm that they had early onset complications from an unknown spinal disorder, such as scoliosis and instability in their discs. this meant that they had to be mindful of how they moved their body or else they could risk a spasm or a flare up of pain. nonetheless, benny was still a rambunctious child who often winded up in the emergency room because of their adrenaline seeking behaviors. his parents were very exasperated by their actions and struggled to find ways to keep them safe while letting them engage in typical kid things

12) benny swears like a sailor and to the point where he can make willy (a former sailor) blush with his language. the first time benny ever swore was in middle school where he was confronted by a bully and he was so done with the abuse that he told them to “suck my fucking dick, you asshole!”

15) benny's defining strengths are their ability to adapt to most situations, their passion, and their kindness

16) benny's defining flaws are their recklessness, their stubbornness, and their tendency to isolate from others

17) benny loves odd numbers, specifically odd multiples of 3 (9, 15, 21, and so on); they usually do tasks like brushing their teeth in odd multiples of 3 (brush teeth -> mouthwash -> floss)

18) benny's a major stoner, he primarily uses it for pain relief but has been known to do it socially and provides his homies with weed; they're not much of a drinker, they think alcohol tastes like fire

19) HAHAHAHA THE LOVE QUESTION!!! benny's very turned off by the prospect of romantic love, given that they're cursed with the knowledge that they will die from broken heart syndrome. nonetheless, they 10000% believe in queerplatonic and platonic love

once again thanks for sending me this ask!!!

[im-tempted]

more disco elysium text dump under cut (very long I love this game so much help guys)

He's such a fucking dweeb I'm in love with this speed freak 40 year old cringe fail man

@youmustfixyourheartt sorry for @'ing you but this one made me think of you the world should be better it's fucked up it's not but it is easier with music god is it easier

I just love this whole latter thing it's... it's my everything I love it so much it's so them "you just climbed it, like a regular person" KING. SHIT. kim I am in love with you

assigned psychic by middle-aged buddy cop

HEY GUY wow ok ok wow ok cool cool cool cool calm down for any seconds ok hey squad fam what if ok we'll be THINKING about THAT

how many times can I just say 'I am in love with kim kitsuragi' before it get's repetitive

GAY RIGHTS!

this is the whole plot of the game in one line I will be thinking about this forever I am crafting my whole world view around this I am filling a page on my notebook with this line I am passing the fuck out

I have no idea where to put this I don't think I'll ever be the same after this game

mecore

I can't explain how much I love these little voices chatting they are so silly my boys <3

the only line ever so real best takedown of leftist discourse this century

kim meets baby gay speed freaks he is so cute about it

...ya... mhm

GAY RIGHTS!

he's... kim <3 awww look at him he really DOES care

I don't think I can have a normal reaction to anything shivers has ever said I will lie awake thinking about it do you think the busses that used to run lines that where shut down due to disuse miss the roads? do you think the land remembers us the way our bodies remember the land? do you think my city loves me as much as I love it? do you think I'll ever be able to love it enough?

[sqvar3w4ve]

the whole 1975 thing pisses me off. people cant seem to comprehend that this isnt some black and white situation where its just homophobia because its so much more than that. i couldnt care less if he jacked off on stage, the problem is that he did this in a country thats incredibly queerphobic and because of that is incredibly strict on what bands can play here and what they can and cant do/say. We malaysians don't get alot od international bands as is, so bands like this and the strokes coming here of all places in our shit hole country is huge. but him saying and doing all that did this:

- cancelled the entire event because our government caught wind of it and shut it down after the first night when it was supposed to go on for 3

- probably made the rules and restrictions for bands to play here even tighter

- made other bands hesitant to play here

- maybe even tightened up the laws on queer people here in general, even more worse than they already are

- possibly put a lot of queer malaysians in general in danger because if the pigs suddenly decided to investigate the event further and question the organisers or people who attended and those people happened to be queer and they found out? theyre going straight to jail because that's how queer people are treated here by our government

yeah there are a good chunk of people here angry purely because of homophobia, that fact isnt something that can be denied or glossed over. but the most important thing here is the queer people that are gonna be put in danger. we're already consistently used as a political scape goat. but now we've finally started to take baby steps in the right direction of progress after finally electing the first pm in our history thats leftist (when in reality he's centrist at best) and now with how matty healy behaved and what he said, our governments fear of queer people have been confirmed and we might be in even more hot water. they've already discussed about making being queer a mental illness and this might give them the push to confirm everything.

what he did did nothing but do bad. we didnt need some white guy to tell us how oppressed we are, how queer people are ridiculed discriminated and abused, trust me buddy, we've lived here all our lives, we know, we dont need any white saviour telling us this.

people will scoff at countries like Malaysia because of how queerphobic it is and simply throw any empathy and kindness out the window, but people seem to forget that this queerphobia exists for a reason. the queerphobia here exists because WE exist, because WE QUEER MALAYSIANS EXIST. it doesn't just exist just because, they're hateful of us because we are here, they're hell bent on getting rid of us because we are here.

I've seen some people say "then just don't get international bands" why? why dont we get to have the opportunity to see the bands we like? why dont we get to have fun? what makes so inherintly lesser that we dont get to indulge in stuff like this like people from other countries do? we already are barred from being openly queer, is it so much to ask that we just want to have a good time by seeing bands we love? do we not deserve that just because people think our government and the shit heads here represent our entire country, acting like theres absolutely no queer communities here constantly fighting for our right to exist? is that why people think so lowly of us?

queer malaysians are now in danger and our progress have been set back 50 steps thanks to matty healys "activism". I understand that he did it in good faith, but it just came off as entitled, privileged and selfish, especially with how he handled it after the fact.

if you're here to argue or insult me on this post, dont bother, im blocking you. im not wasting my time.

[lakehare]

I’m sorry but I think the idea of racism, transphobia, and bigotry and such not ‘belonging’ in pagan communities is such horse shit. I know that sounds off, but hear me out - because you may feel that way and hold those values, you may denounce fascists, but like… I know first hand my experience with progressive and leftist pagan and spiritual spaces have been anything but devoid of bigotry and microaggression, if not outright aggression, and I am not the only one. Spiritual and religious spaces in 2023 will claim to be progressive and leftist in one breath and with the same one say you are too sensitive.

They sleep in the middle - they follow political trend. I have rarely met a pagan or spiritual person who truly knows themself or their politics enough to not enact some sort of bigoted violence against me or my kin, whether out of ignorance or malice, and then be unwilling to learn better and insist upon your guilt because you dared point it out - no matter the manner you did it in. Firm or gentle - you are being aggressive. And I know I am not the only one with this experience. So saying “fascism / bigotry has no place” is great and all, but a bit of an empty statement, and I only wish to see MORE come from it. Perhaps a denounciation of the falsity of all of this, of the liberalism, an encouragement of self reflection and how you treat others. It’s why I gave up on a large scale, and fight the big fights quietly - I can change no one who doesn’t want to, and I don’t need to, nor is it my job nor my business. I don’t actually want or need people looking at me for guidance, as some authority figure. I don’t need people looking at me as the new herder for their political slogan to parrot without actually making meaningful change within themselves, the slogan this time being “fascism/bigotry has no space in pagan spaces”.

I don’t need centrist/liberal, puritanical, democrat neo-spiritualists parading and masquerading as the most progressive leftists on the market to help me boot fascism out when they are unwilling to stop sleeping in the same bed as them or attempt to change their own ways, or do anything helpful towards the communities they’re in or even towards their IRL communities.

(Disclaimer inb4 bad faith - sure, some pagans and neospiritualists get this and do try. But they are not who I’m talking about here).

Calling out fascists changes nothing about how people act. Changes nothing about transmisogynistic, racist, sexist microaggressions (which is what actually reminded me of my position on this topic - given that it’s NOT the first time I’ve said this before, that just saying uwu there’s no place for bigotry in MY paganism) if you want a good example of what I’m speaking of, the best connection I can give you, this post by my mutual can inform you of performativity in regards to community acts against transmisogyny while snubbing trans women (and doing nothing of value for them) & maybe give a little insight into what I mean.

It does not stop people from lugging their own religious and spiritual baggage into the space and spewing it around to all who will hear, and those are really the things that I think should be focused on, not public smack downs in order to laugh and giggle with your buddies about such a serious thing. Clowning privately is one thing, I think clowning to thousands in order to get praise for your wit and cunning is quite another.

You can only change your actions and show others how to act by how you act in these spaces - and of course, I do not know others nearly as well as I know myself. But I, as a younger person, did the whole righteous crusade against bigoted people, in order to feel like I was doing something significant. And YES. Fascism needs to be pushed out of pagan spaces! I agree, allowing them to get a foothold in any country in any manner but especially a wide scale is NOT acceptable.

But the way it seems virtue signaling to me, the way it seems to push yourself into a space of authority, and rankles me, as someone who realized the exact issues with what I was doing. It is quite an ego boost when people listen to what you have to say and get to defend your moral and ethical stances, yes? And I was on an even smaller scale than some of these (now) BNPs.

I’m not saying people have to do their good deeds quietly, that’s Christian bullshit. But the manner of which I see a lot of (now) Big Name Pagans do this ruffles my feathers in an unnerving way. I can’t quite articulate exactly the way this is unnerving and unnecessary and how there are other ways and middle grounds (at the moment - I took an anxiety pill last night and I’m surprised at my coherency here) that don’t involve the grand standing, but if the lines are read between in good faith I have hope that my point comes across clear.

[ladyknightskye]

Okay, look. Look.

I just saw that "who is morally worst poll" that John Winchester won, and I - (rant beneath the cut)

Look. John Winchester is not a good parent. But the problem of John Winchester is not that he is on the Evil spectrum of the alignment chart y'all. Does he become the target of fans' own parental issues and traumas? Yes. Is he objectively a neglectful parent? Yes.

Is he ACTUALLY more morally reprehensible than Crowley? No.

I would argue that John Winchester's problem is not that he has too few morals but that he has too many. John Winchester is the bad kind of Lawful Good. He's the kind of Lawful Good that has a code (not necessarily one that jives with the laws of the land) but that code is not something he's going to give up for anyone including his children.

"But Skye, his whole deal was vengeance!"

And? That doesn't negate the fact that he took it upon himself to become a hunter of anything supernatural and not just Ole Yeller Eyes!

"But Skye, the dude lied, cheated, and stole all the time!"

Yes, in service to his ultimate goal of wiping anything supernatural off the face of the planet. And let's be real my lil leftist buddies - a lot of the people he was hurting with those crimes you would cheer about in any other context. Large banks, cops - those are not people most of us are fans of.

"Skye, that was a joke poll on Tumblr dot Hell."

Yes, and I made the mistake of looking in the comments. There are people out here on this very webbed site that think that "morals = being an actual good person" and don't seem to know what morals actually are.

Morals are a set of standards and beliefs that people have that tell them what they may and may not do in society.

Everyone has different morals, y'all.

Crowley is the definition of Neutral Evil. He will do whatever it takes to get what he wants, and yeah, maybe that shifts a bit as the story goes on, but for the vast majority of it, my dude doesn't give two shits what is right or wrong, just what is good for him at that given moment.

John, on the other hand, has morals. They're fucked up and not in line with the rest of society but he has them. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean they aren't there.

"Skye, you're just a John Winchester apologist."

No, I'm a person that really dislikes how the larger part of this fandom choses which characters can have nuance and which ones can't, usually based on which character they project on the most, and also refuse to engage with how their personal biases might color how they perceive these characters. I am well a-fucking-ware that I project a LOT of things on Dean because I see an awful lot of my own life's story in his, and this is not a bad thing, but I also know that this can color how I view other characters like Sam.

I am not a fan of Sam, and I'm aware that my dislike has little to do with the character himself and more to do with how I transpose my own feelings and memories on Dean. I am fully cognizant of this, and that's why I make caveats whenever I examine Sam as a character. Because I have biases! We all have biases! And that's okay!

I just want people to be aware of this and acknowledge it!!!

[catsnuggler]

One big problem we leftists have, which we often talk about yet struggle with, anyway, as more people struggling with this continue to join us, is social conservatism. Many of us think everything has to be pure and fit the Only Way, God's Way the Ideologically Pure Way, and anything outside of that is something we are uncomfortable with, must be demonized, and must be crushed, repressed, banned, Das ist VERBOTEN, the whole nine yards.

Another problem many of us have is common to "left"-liberals, centrists, and conservatives alike - a punitive nature. This is something I have struggled with, still do. Someone does something so heinous, and you want them locked up. If we want a world free of prisons, that means a world free of prisons, even ones that would be ran by us. No prisons, no prison slavery, no minimum sentences, no life sentences, no death sentences (though, frankly, I wouldn't mind if Kissinger got one), not even the allegedly cushy prisons in Scandinavia where the prison was once accidentally unlocked, and the prisoners just used the opportunity to bake brownies and stuff. Not even that. No prisons.

Then, there's "left"-liberalism. I've known anarchists who support state-ran gun control. Anarchists who know full well that the state is our enemy, that the cops and the military lean right, that many of them are Nazis. That the liberals in government know this, and don't really give a damn, and, when pressured, just make the cops wear bodycams that they then promptly turn off. That there's no way in Hell these guys would disarm their buddies along with us, they would just disarm us - and even if they disarmed their buddies, they'd give them right back later on, when they feel like making a gambit.

Another problem we have is the liberal fetishization of "progress", as if every new idea is good. Eugenics was new, and marketed as progress. The atomic bomb was a major leap in scientific discovery, and the usage of it was justified with how it would allegedly save lives; really, the US just wanted to scare the pants off of Stalin, who had finally broken his pact with the Japanese and invaded Manchuria, crushing the Kwantung Army, Japan's largest army, in a matter of days. These were new ideas, marks of "progress", and all they did was cause suffering.

I'm not saying we need to become reactionaries and idealize the past. I'm saying we shouldn't fetishize time, past or present. The nuclear family is another recent phenomenon, which has eroded and even wiped out community. Extended family used to be much more in contact with each other, and communities existed much more often, people could depend on each other more. On the other hand, white communities used to entertain themselves by lynching Black people, and families used to kill disabled children so as not to "burden" their communities. Clearly, the past isn't perfect, and some abhorrent practices are best left abandoned. Just saying, an idea isn't bad because it's old, good because it's new, or vice versa. It's good if it uplifts people, doesn't put down anyone, and increases freedom of humanity and our relatives.

Let's not forget, after all, that socialism, communism, and anarchism largely came about as a result of European observation of communitarian and egalitarian so-called "primitive" and "savage" peoples, such as the Haudenosaunee Confederacy. They idealized their societies, all while saying they practiced "primitive" socialism, and so Europeans must simultaneously struggle to achieve socialism while inevitably these "less developed nations" eventually caught up to speed. Sounds gross, and it is. It's theoretically and morally wrong. Not that Haudenosaunee society was (or is! They still exist!) perfect, but European societies also weren't so perfect and enlightened as we pretended to be.

The merit of an idea is in its medicine, not its age, nor its youth.

[druid-in-hiding]

Long-time listener, first time caller.

Anti-civ/anarcho-primitivist here, to answer questions / explain some stuff and I apologize in advance for setting some stuff in a longer format than I want, but I gotta.

Because there’s a lot anti-civ folks who are flat out lost in what correlates to fascist-land. (to add to @mobilesuitgudang’s comment, add to tropical diseases something like Type 1 diabetes, fibro-myalgia, psoriatic arthritis, etc. and then say “but only the most prepared should survive!” Fuck that noise. If you can’t handle sick or disabled OR the elderly, why the fuck are you screaming for the end of civilization. Think it through, people. Yeesh—meant as a note to anti-civ folks who are not me, to be clear)

Wiki tracks anti-civ sentiment to critiques by Rousseau and Horkheimer, and while they present some interested commentary (based on the horrible flawed “Enlightenment”), that’s not my entry to anti-civ.

The modern “founders” of the anarcho-primitivist movement can be properly dropped into four authors: Daniel Quinn, John Zerzan, Derrick Jensen, and Ted Kaczynski. Some later folks, like Paul Shepard, John Fillis, and Richard Heinberg offered up their take on what they think made the world go askew.

You could also lump Masanobu Fukuoka, David Abrams, and Rob Hopkins in there if you want, but they are more interested in practical applications rather than general philosophy.

In general, they tend to blame agriculture / domestication for the rise of civilization. But more specifically, they promoted hard different origins to get back to a “state of nature” (wtf is that exactly?).

Zerzan argued it was “abstract language”. Quinn pointed at agriculture. Jensen thought it was cities. Kaczynski went after post-industrial revolution tools (Fillis did too). Shepard went for domestication. Heinberg went for addiction psychology. (Note: I liked Quinn the best and he was my entry, but, oh the flaws… I’ll get into that later)

Looking at all of the above, you can probably spot the big glaring issues: none of those authors really managed to lay out a path that was rooted in the actual material reality of the world or in the understanding of it based in anthropology or archeology or even the lived experiences of the indigenous people that anarcho-primtivism lauded.

Quinn, which is the primary author that inspired me, spent his whole life trying to puzzle this out, leading to some inspired conversation and fellowship. Jason Godesky and Peter Bauer laid out some very, very interesting dialogues based on those conversations.

Zerzan promotes getting rid of “abstract language” which is, oh, impossible and unreasonable.

Kaczynski decided to blow people up.

Derrick Jensen joined up with Lierre Keith to create a movement that completely reviles trans folks and “leftists” and supports members who ally with literal fascists. Gee… “good” job changing the world there, buddy. (deep, frustrated sigh, since I hold a virulent hatred of the DGR TERFs)

A 50/50 “success rate” (success being defined as not turning fascist/uselessly violent) is not a good fucking look, let me tell you.

So why do I still consider myself an anarcho-primitivist?

I’m going to start with a premise most folks in the Global South would agree with: this shit is not sustainable.

The Global North literally exists as a plunder-machine. Every advance is at the expense of the rest of the world, which includes a hell of a lot of people in the so-called civilized north. But WHY is it unsustainable?

Breaking it down, any city—which can be defined as a static collection of humans living on a plot of land that cannot provide the resources those humans need to survive—is inherently unsustainable.

The earth isn’t here to provide people with infinite resources. Even in the most sustainable cultures, there were times when the most basic supplies were scarce. In a sustainable culture, if everything ran down to damn near nothing, there were options, because you set up your landscape to give you those options. “Starvation” foods (which might kill you but are a last ditch often), inferior building materials, “dirty” water sources that normally would be left alone. Enhanced trading…

But cities rely solely on imports. They MUST because their population is too dense for the land to support them. So if they’re going through it and their neighbors maybe can’t trade, what are they going to do?

They’re going to go to war.

And inevitably, by using up the resources around them without renewing them properly (which happens when you go to war consistently), they—and their culture—collapse.

There is no civilization on the face of the planet that has lasted more than a few thousand years at best. Most are locked into a vastly shorter time frame. There are “uncivilized” cultures, though, that have been around since time immemorial… and that means, in some cases, for tens of thousands of years. That doesn’t meant those cultures haven’t changed. It means they have persisted across multiple near-extinction events due to good planning.

Not excellent planning. Not miraculous or lucky planning. No. Just good planning.

Good planning that includes a strong connection to the landscape, which is easy to do if you are training yourself and your kids in very simple ways to pay attention.

No romanticized exaggerations of indigenous societies or mystical “appeals to nature” needed.

So if civilization has a major, lethal design flaw, why the fuck does it control most of the world? HOW did it get that way? Is it because wheat has “exorphins” which mimic opiates in the human system (cow milk has that too, btw)? Abstract language? Tech? Farming?

It’s so much simpler than that.

And it’s textual.

(But I DO understand why folks missed it)

Point the first: when you study “mythology”, you are studying the mytho-history of a culture. In this, exaggerated versions of actual events (for dramatic purposes, because folks were telling these around campfires and you want folks to remember) are mixed in with metaphors or direct instructions for whatever culture is telling those myths.

Every myth is part of a core instruction pamphlet for a culture. And most of those are obscured if you don’t live in the landscape that gave birth to those myths.

Why is that relevant here?

Point the second: The myths of the first “major” civilizations tell the story of what happened.

And it ain’t about farming or abstract language or technology.

It’s about fear.

Ever have something big and scary happen to you? What’s your first instinct? For most folks it’s to band together. Find friends or family or some other safe venue. Hells, look at major disasters: in most cases, people look for aid as others reach out and help. That’s part of what defines us as a people.

Abstract language helped us create stories as a framework to survive what otherwise would be unprecedented events.

Growing things is almost as old as mankind, INCLUDING indigenous societies growing crops.

Tech is just us being clever apes and manipulating resources so we can thrive. Fire is pretty much one of the first major tech that we had that helped make us human. The sole difference between then and now is that physical tech development was slower because any development was tested against whether it would upset the balance the culture had with the landscape they lived in. Now, people throw insane amounts of resources into inventing both smart AND stupid shit, not paying any significant attention to the fact that we are wrecking entire eco-regions.

So then, why cities? Why create something with tools that we already had (language, tech, gardening)?

Civilization is a social technology that occurs when an entire successful culture experiences a sincere and persistent shock.

Here’s the basics of the oldest myths (Babylonian, Sumerian), which reflect their cultural reality: they were facing horrific floods due to the end of the interglacial—which unfolded in different areas at different times—and many, many people were dying. Their chief technologist, in return for being made leader, cut irrigation ditches into the land which absolutely fucking devastated everything they used to use to survive. However, having planned for this, he replaced the old food with some mono-crops, specifically lots of wheat. The fact that wheat could also be made into beer also took the edge off of a suffering people.

If we were to put this technologist into a modern perspective, we would say Marduk/Anu was an ardent atheist. His first command was “fuck the gods. We kill them. We owe them nothing. They owe US!”

Even with that success, the sheer amount of labor that had to be put into the system led to an initial failure. Until they located a nearby culture that was even in worse shape (starving to death), so they enslaved them and called them “humans” (calling themselves “gods”). To these “gods”, they were doing the humans a favor. And the humans fucking owed them for it. Forever.

And thus it began.

Every city from that branch, since then, has been locked into this cycle. It requires a slave branch and it requires war and expansion to survive. But it can’t survive so it collapses. The people trained in being civilized don’t know of any other options so they build another city elsewhere and the cycle goes on and on and on.

Contrast that with other city experiments: the Anasazi or Cahokia or even the Mayans. The tech was tested, it failed, and a bunch of them went “meh. Back to another kind of culture we go.”

Which leads me to my point.

We are locked into a failing technological branch, specifically a social technology. All of the benefits of civilization that most people talk about are physical technologies which may have been invented over time (because technology DID advance without civilization) or may be infeasible because it’s simply too hard of a drain on local resources… which means that when a civilization collapses (and it will!), your precious tech is fucked.

If you doubt that, watch some of those History Channel B.S. shows where they talk about aliens setting up this or aliens setting up that. It’s pretty much 90% racism (“those primitive people couldn’t be THAT smart) that highlights how smart the people actually were.

Yes, ancient people made cool shit. They also abandoned a bunch of it when it turned out to be not what they needed or wanted to maintain.

When you see civ for what it is—a failed technological branch and a social technology at that—you recognize that we MUST create something different because the system-as-is will collapse and that is a vastly worse scenario than creating something new.

re: abstract language, we can and should use it to reconnect to the world. The reason why people used to talk about “spirits of the land” and have “gods in the world” is because, at it’s heart, it is a way to have people empathize with the landscape so that they can pay attention to it and maintain it. The minute you start treating it as inherently hostile or worthless (except in its utility. I see the flaws in you, communism. :P ) you create a situation where a culture can simply take, take, take, until the culture collapses. Which is what we are currently locked in.

re: farming, farming is just stupid gardening. It doesn’t mean you can’t grow things. It doesn’t even mean you can’t mono-crop. What it does mean is that you should work with your eco-region and the animals within it to encourage diversity so that if, say, a hard winter or dry summer or other uncommon occurrence happens, you don’t lose everything.

Humanity did go from a glacial period to an interglacial, by the way. We have done this shit before.

re: tech, it’s as simple as EROEI; is the energy invested in creating and maintaining your tech worth the return? I would argue that communication technologies are vital because they allow clever people to pass along successful ideas and their failures. Transport is less vital than you think. Medicine is more but there’s a lot of localization that can occur. Weapons are, more often than not, a ridiculous way to keep stupid people in power.

So if I believe in the above, why am I using a technological device in the Global North? Simply put, two reasons: (1) humans are built as social animals and you need a culture around you to thrive… and a new culture like that doesn’t exist yet. And (2) as long as civilization maintains a stranglehold on the planet, it doesn’t matter how many new cultures pop up because they are all at risk by a bad social technology that must steal from them to survive (poorly).

I am in absolute agreement that there are plenty of anti-civ “leftist/post-leftist” anarcho-primitivists that go done a remarkably fascist pipeline. In part because in the Global North everyone is stewing in fascism all the time (thanks civ!). But also because the fascists are seeking a way out of this as well. The fascists, though, are seeking control and “righteous purges” along the same line that literally started civilization. So the fascists will walk right into the same fucking trap Anu set so long ago, going “This time we’ll get it right.”

Spoilers: they won’t.

If you run across an anti-civ person who is going “tech all bad!”, “overpopulation must go!”,”the strong must survive”, throw their ass my way and I’ll try to set them straight.

They are flailing around in the deep end of a pool of ideas.

The truth is much, much simpler.

The solution, though, is vastly more complex and I don’t have all those answers. I wish I did. My job, at the moment, is trying to dig out some European root philosophies to force Northern culture to re-think its bullshit ideologies. Wish me luck. Please. Cause I’m gonna need it.

Which is why I post things like this on tumblr.

Hellscape though it might be, at least we are all mad here.

We’re all in this together.

if, when i was less online, or rather online in non-english speaking communities, you would've mentioned a fringe ideology whose adherents believe that overpopulation is real and must be stopped (with all the racist preconceptions this implies), that mandatory vaccination is too oppressive, that the way to deal with societal problems is through individual direct action and that those most prepared should thrive, that we live in a time of degeneracy and must dismantle society to return to an idyllic state of pastoral communion with nature, i would've assume you were talking to me about capital f Fascists, you know, not about leftists, much less anarchists. but no, apparently anti-civs count as leftists and anarchists. i was very surprised because i never encountered one of those in my country, nor any of its neighbouring countries, not in any of their neighbouring countries. but then again, i'm south american and i didn't move around fascist circles and i never ascribed to reddit ideologies

[galarian-weezing-on-prep]

so many dudes base their self-worth around their utilitarian function and will not examine that

speaking as a blue collar bitch who was raised rural and still mostly pals around with farmers and tradesmen, that’s like our whole sense of identity. what is harry for? harry is for plowing the fields and fixing the tractors. he bonds with his buddies over a beer chatting about whether john deere is still the best going. he does his function, and if he performs it well, he earns community. if he doesn’t, he understands that other men won’t appreciate him, women won’t desire him, and his kids won’t love him

the average man is not urban, not well educated, and is never going to therapy. he lives an insular and fairly simple life. this is a hard pill for people who are terminally academic to swallow

you wanna fix these guys? encourage them to join clubs that also serve a community purpose. get them to enquire with the freemasons (I say with legitimate seriousness), get them to go back to church or whatever the faith institution of their background is (needing leftists to put aside fears that doing so will make them drift further right— focus on triage here), encourage them to volunteer with meals on wheels, join their local legion, or a service organization like the lions club or the optimists, like there are several many options here

men are raised to feel like we’re worthless until someone needs us, and that’s just how it is. you can spend time trying to fix society and overthrow oppressive structures of systemic injustice, but in the meantime the majority of men are not paying attention to that and they wouldn’t feel smart enough to engage with it even if they did. again i’m talking about like the average man here, not well-educated higher-class metropolitan men. they’re a whole other problem, and there are already hour long youtube essays on how to fix them lol

the “male loneliness epidemic” is funny as a concept until it has real impact on the rise of fascism, and i’m afraid that boys will just keep being born lol. rage against men is warranted and should be expressed, and i am not suggesting anyone needs to be nice to dudes in order to get us acting right. what i’m saying is that most men are never going to have time to critically examine why they think and behave as they do— they just need to feel needed. funnel them into a social club which aids their community

[night-city-valentines]

Starfield Review (finally)

So, my desire to build a spaceship and fly around shooting shit finally outweighed my annoyance at Todd Howard, and I've finished the main story of Starfield.

For some context, I played Starfield Day One. I had a character who I grew pretty attached to, and was planning on seeing everything the game had to offer. Then the game decided my save was busted.

I was so pissed, it took from about a week from Starfield's launch to a couple of days ago for me to even consider starting anew. But that's what I did.

And now, I can safely say that Starfield is a solid 7/10. Maybe a 6 if I'm feeling harsh.

The gameplay itself is, like, whatever. If you've played Fallout 4, it's kinda like that but without VATS. Sometimes (rarely) you'll be in low-gravity areas. Spaceship combat is, honestly, where I have to give the game credit. It doesn't reinvent the wheel, and it isn't some simulator. To quote Roddney Toddney Howard, it just works. It's fun to do spaceship dogfights!

What ISN'T fun is a billion loading screens.

Unlike, say, No Man's Sky, space travel is not seamless. There's a cutscene to take off, a cutscene to fly between planets, a cutscene to LAND on a planet. The spaceship feels needless half of the time, and the game really does not put you in enough ship combat segments for my liking. I do like building ships, but even that is hampered by you needing to hop between ports to browse all the parts - which, I remind you, involves about 3 or 4 loading screens.

Onto the characters and stories, yknow the meat and potatoes of an RPG (which Starfield claims to be). When they were revealed as the main group of the game, I saw Constellation and went "Oh god, they're gonna make you be a goody-two shoes". I was half-right. You CAN be a murderous space vandal, but then you have to deal with literally EVERY character in Constellation hating your guts. Fine, I like characters that have a moral code. The problem is that A, how the hell do literally ALL of them hate space pirates, and B, the game contradicts itself! When you first meet her, Sarah Morgan basically says "do what you want, as long as you don't get us into trouble, hell some of us are ex-cons", and then ALSO has a line later on in the story where she implies she has sympathy for Spacers and pirates. Barrett, the only tolerable Constellation member, is not only an ex-smuggler, but briefly befriends a pirate captain holding him hostage, as the two realise they aren't so different. BOTH of these characters IMMEDIATELY get angry with you (not a description of emotion, that is a state within the game) the moment you do piracy near them, or choose to side with the Crimson Fleet (we'll get to that).

The game front-loads itself with interesting ideas, mechanics, and concepts, but then either doesn't expand them, or forgets they existed.

"But V, why would a pirate-aligned person work with a group of explorers?" Uh, money?? Because in the United Sta- I mean Colonies, criminal =/= bad person? Have a character be like "yea I rob people, and I'm like mostly hunting artifacts to maybe make some money, but also I keep my pirate buddies off of our backs and would share the take with Constellation". Boom, I thought of that in 30 seconds, but you're telling me an army of professional writers didn't consider it?

I joked a second ago, but the UC really is just 'what if America but space'. The Freestar Collective is also 'what if america but space', but closer to 'what if wild west but space' with the way things are run. There's also House Varu'un who're religious zealots but, like anything interesting, they have very little screentime outside of a story mission and a faction mission. The whole morality of the game feels very...Suburban Liberal. Again, context here, I am a leftist, so this isn't a wOkE bAd thing.

The game is also...strange when it comes to WHO you get to know. In the MSQ, you have missions with all members of Constellation except one - Noel. Arguably, Matteo, Andreja, and Vlad only get half a mission. Reminder, these are meant to be your MAIN companions. Sure you speak to them during quests, but outside of that its up to you whether you interact with them. Not that you'd want to, they're all fairly...nothing. Except Barrett.

Then, you look at the Crimson Fleet. During their faction quests, you don't often do much mission-ing with them, but you DO get to know them much better than Constellation. The big choice you make in that quest line is whether you help them get a fuckton of cash, or betray them to UC (who you got forced Into working for). Everything about the setup, missions, and just how well you get to know the Fleet, leaves me thinking that you're MEANT to side with the Fleet, but as I said earlier, all of your Constellation-mates will be LIVID.

The main story itself is just...whatever. They set up the quest to find the Artifacts as some kind of 'who made these' thing, but then the question shifts to 'what are these things', and then you find that out and also meet the Starborn and just go 'Well:) glad we solved the mystery!', with the question of their origin only coming up in the ENDING, and EVEN THEN you still don't get an answer, just a hand-wavy "who knoooows" kinda response.

Also the powers are dumb. STOP MAKING EVERY PROTAGONIST A SPECIAL SAUSAGE, BETHESDA, IT IS OKAY FOR THE PLAYER CHARACTER TO JUST BE A REGULAR PERSON!!!!!!!

All in all, Starfield is a game that takes concepts and gameplay from other, better games, half-asses them, and only gets nominated for one category at the Game Awards (that it is definitely going to lose, because its up against Baldur's Gate 3). Fuck you, Todd.

[radio-charlie]

A bit amused when ppl think its news to tell me “this is a pro-russia source” etc. do you think that everybody round these parts is stupid or something. not everybody has the resources to know about these things, but those who do... well. have u ever wondered why even leftists are gravitating towards them. its not because we’re all secretly nazis lol.

Here in particular i want to be careful to speak only for myself. but i was very careful about picking sides in this war. and had the luxury to refrain for a long time. over time it became clear that while i did not trust these pro-russia voices, what they were sharing was of more use to us here than wtv the hell the NEDites were telling us to do abt our problems. as the years passed, it became obvious that they wanted the problems to persist, to worsen. because there is no better way for them to guarantee that there will be some rift or tortured demographic here they can wield to their advantage.

I have no doubt that russia benefits from the same. the difference is that the might they get to wield in the international arena still pales in comparison to the US. even if they’re buddy-buddy with china. they also do not have the track record the US does. do i even need to share all those links again. the thing that has pulverised our left and then attempted to zombify its most promising to make a mockery of ‘empowerment’, ‘emancipation’, all these beautiful things - it wasn’t the FSB you know.

And so - people aren’t naive enough to think US bad therefore Russia good. that’s your bruised little ego talking. you need to condescend to us some way or other and you do not see how you are part of this whole problem. we understand the concept of a lesser evil. you’re just mad we don’t think that it is you. :(

[headlessmind]

the other day i was talking to my singing teacher about politics and she was like "oh wow you've really moved to the left a lot" and i had this realization that the pandabear made me forget how to hide my political opinions in front of others..............

[sugaredoleander]

looking for very specific friends

a list of media ranging from being incredibly niche to not incredibly niche but that i'm deeply obsessed with and would like to talk to someone about

the search for signs of intelligent life

subnormality (webcomic)

people watching (webseries)

legends of tomorrow

smoke gets in your eyes, from here to eternity, will my cat eat my eyeballs, the death positive movement in general, even just caitlin doughty's youtube channel

alice isn't dead

the magnus archives

i'm thinking of ending things (book & movie)

tuca and bertie

the mad ones (the musical)

compatibility is based off specifity, so i will now list some of my favourite things that haven't already been listed

movies

everything everywhere all at once

mamma mia!

promising young woman

the handmaiden

pride

fear street

the half of it

saving face

but i'm a cheerleader

kajillionaire

tv shows

killing eve

the haunting of hill house

the haunting of bly manor

midnight mass

russian doll

sense8

crazy ex-girlfriend

wynonna earp

a series of unfortunate events (also grew up with the books, which is Very evident in my writing)

derry girls

one day at a time

books

less

the secret history

this is how you lose the time war

war of the foxes

crush

music

the mountain goats

mitski

indigo girls

zolita

ABBA

some of my all-time most played songs on spotify

i guess - mitski

ghost - indigo girls

working for the knife - mitski

JUDAS - the reverent marigold

this is a life - son lux

putting the dog to sleep - the antlers

amy aka spent gladiator 1 - the mountain goats

a better son/daughter - rilo kiley

misc.

interior design & architecture

country & folk music but especially specifically lesbian country & folk music

hannah gadsby

mary oliver

lefttube

museums

dark academia

stabat mater by vivaldi but specifically the version on the talented mr. ripley soundtrack

tove jansson

dykes to watch out for

queer horror & narrative podcasts

oh. the very concept of hobbies. the artistic, the culinary, the physical, if you bounce from interest to interest & have an incessant curiosity for the world

add ten points if you are a

medstudent

lesbian

leftist

writer

ADHD-er

live in italy bc i'm (hopefully, assuming i do well enough on the IMAT*) moving there this fall & don't have any local friends *if you're also studying for the IMAT, add 20 points, i need a study buddy

do NOT reach out if you

are under 18

don't support lgbtq rights, terfs do not interact

don't support BLM

are anti-choice

in any way do not support the liberation of marginalised people

if you went through this whole list, add ten points because i talk a lot & type very fast so expect a lot of reading. and if, going through the list, you found yourself thinking, hey, i do that! repeatedly, the inbox is open, come chat!

[baronetcoins]

buddy you KNOW i want those speeches thoughts

*deep sigh* fine. let's do this.

My qualifications here are thus: I did three years of competitive speech and debate, and did pretty well for myself (two time state qualifier, two time national qualifier, one time state champion). I also spent a year as team co-captain, and a year helping a teacher at my school teach the speech and communications class. Also, i'm an extremely judgemental bitch. With that in mind,

Hakeem Jeffries

Jeffries started out his speech by thanking the Democratic caucus, and by calling them out for being unified. Which makes sense, that's a good contrast to draw and it comes across as more dignified for not mentioning the Republicans or their negative example by name and instead just going on the positives.

He then moved on to praising Pelosi for her leadership, calling her the greatest speaker of all time, and setting up what I'd call the main rhetorical theme of Jeffries' speech: alliteration. Jeffries loves alliteration. I can't tell you if that's a common factor of all of his speeches, because I haven't watched any outside of this one, but boy. Does he like his alliteration.

"Throughout her time in congress she's been a legendary legislator, a fabulous facilitator, and a non-nonsense negotiator. [...] A defender of democracy. A voice for the voiceless, and a powerful champion for the children, the climate, charm city, California, the caucus, the congress, the country, and the constitution."

There's a bible Quote detour after the Pelosi section, which I'm not personally a fan of because it seems like it's a detour that's unnecessary. However, what he uses it to transition to is great and something more democrats should do: talk about their goddamn accomplishments. It includes a line that I think any other speaker would have made sound incredibly cheesy, but I think Jeffries pulls off:

"The D in Democrat stands for 'deliver'."

(which of course got boos from the Republican side. lots of heckling. whatever, children.)

The next section does a lot of laying out an agenda going forwards, I think it's inoffensive and fine, and there's another big chunk of alliteration. You think I'm kidding about this speech? go watch it for yourself.

I liked the language about diversity, mostly, though did notice that trans people were glaringly missing from his whole thing about the kind of people who make up America. Whatever.

Rhetorically, I like framing the Democratic party as the party of the American dream. For as much as like. leftists will criticize that idea, I think it's probably still persuasive to a lot of people and I'm always going to argue for effectiveness of outcome over ideological purity. I also like pointing at the house Republicans and their bullshit and saying "we're reasonable! ball's in your court" (paraphrasing).

And then, the main event. The grand listing of Democratic values, an alphabetical list of alliteration. You can watch it here, set to music. I kinda liked how pointed it got! I'm a big fan of people who don't pull punches when they're dealing with bullshit, and I don't think this did that. Also, I respect that he got all the way to the end of the alphabet that's a hard feat to pull off. Do you know how hard it is to find political contrasts to make where both parts start with X or Z? I don't think I could have done that!

Overall, I liked it. I don't know if it was great, but it's certainly unique enough to be memorable for a bit, at least among the kind of people who watch 15 minute speeches at like 10 in the evening on a friday (me).

Also, you could see how hard he struggled to find nice things to say as he introduced Kevin lmao

Kevin McCarthy

Starting off strong with an ineffectual little gavel hit like a kid with a new toy, and then an incredibly stupid little joke.

"That was easy, huh?" -Kevin McCarthy, 2023, after 15 ballots.

Followed by a dig at the opposition, for no reason

"Hakeem, I've gotta warn ya. 2 years ago, I got 100% of the vote from my conference."

He then thanked the Clerk, which I actually think is a very good thing to do. I'll give him that. That lady deserves all the kudos she's been getting: normally, nobody knows who she is and then all of a sudden the eyes of the nation are on her. Then he makes an appeal to "my father once told me" which. eugh. I don't like these.

"My father once told me, it's not how you start. It's how you finish."

He then talks about being the son of a firefighter (we get it! we know! I don't know what he thinks this proves!) and then being able to achieve high office in the most uninspiring possible way, as well as shouting out Jeffries' life story too as if we did not just hear it in much more engaging detail like 15 minutes ago.

pictured: a man who is wondering if he has to clap.

Kevin then promises Jeffries that he'll keep debates civil, which. LMAO. Jeffries mouths something in response which might be "no" or "bet". I don't know I don't read lips. (also side note: LOVING the free CSPAN camera angles throughout all of this. Free the cameras. I want to watch reaction shots always.)

He hits the highlights. Bladyada the economy, respect law enforcement, dreams come true in america, etc. He wants to cut spending, lower prices, stop the rise of the national debt (if you're playing the Republican speech drinking game, here's where you take a drink), slash regulations (another drink), do more american energy, the works.

The interesting bit comes after, where he talks about some specifics of his plan for governance. He promises the first bill when they come back is to repeal the funding for 87,000 new IRS agents. He wants to tackle the southern border (take a drink) and stop "woke indoctrination in our schools" (another drink, or maybe throw one at your tv. either way). He's really repetitive in his speech: if i hear "wasteful washington spending" one more time I am going to Lose It. There's some dumb line he seems very proud of here. Oo look at you doing assonance how clever:

"From now on, if a Washington bureaucrat wants to spend it, they will come before us to defend it."

He promises a bipartisan select committee on China, because of course the Republican party has to be hyper focused on China. There are also, apparently, going to be committees on the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the origins of COVID (really? really?? it is the year of our lord 2023 and we're still doing lab leak bullshit?), and the "weaponization of the FBI" (read: raiding Mar-a-lago). These feel like presumably some of the compromises made with the freedom caucus to buy their vote.

IDK I'm focusing on policy so much because his speaking style is so bland. every attempt at flourish falls flat. he is like the lukewarm oatmeal of speaking styles. It just feels clumsy.

He focuses a lot on his little section about opening up the house (physically). Including a dumb little metaphor about the debates being open too. Actually he just talks about debate good a lot which, I say as a former debate kid: lmao.

The thanks to his family does have huge oscar acceptance speech vibes, but it is also probably the best part of this speech. Comes across as cute and genuine. He then follows it with a very dumb quote from a Song, losing the moment entirely. Kevin, fire your speechwriter. He then goes back to his father being a firefighter! We KNOW.

Again, if I have to give him some kudos (reluctantly) it's for his bits about the families of the lawmakers supporting them. I think it's humanizing, a thing he needs desperately.

There's then a whole thing about Lincoln, and the statuary hall because that's where Lincoln served, and oh boy does it sounds like he jerks off to fantasies of Lincoln. Like, listen to this. I'm just going to excerpt it all. (emphasis mine)

"My most favorite spot in this building is not in this Chamber. It's in the chamber they met before, in the statuary hall. It's my favorite place to take people on a tour. You see, it's where Abraham Lincoln served. Just a one term congressman, sat in the back. I like to go to that spot, and I like to stand where he stood. I like to do it at night, when people aren't around. I like to look over, and look at the clock, because that's the same clock and same view that Abraham Lincoln saw. I've watched Lincoln serve in the greatest challenge to our constitution, the Civil War. I watched him take peoples who were rivals. I watched in a time that he did not know if the nation could sustain itself, but he dreamt of a future, and built a railroad across the nation. I want us to all take a moment one time that you are here. I want you to stand there. I want you to look. And I want you to think, if America could do it then, we could do it now one more time."

He promises an open door opportunity, which. Lmao, we'll see. And then he goes on a LONG ramble about the painting of Washington crossing the Delaware that doesn't appear to have a point. If I was coaching this speech, I'd tell him to make the point more explicit or cut this section entirely. It's so weird. It sounds like a freshman paper. He also makes a GREAT mouth typo here:

"If we let everybody in the boat. If we row in the same cadence together. There is no obstacle this body can overcome for this nation."

pictured: Matt Gaetz, on his phone throughout the painting section.

I will also give Kevin one other thing: he's pretty self-deprecating in this speech, and I think that's the only correct tone to take after this embarrassment of a process. Congrats on reading the room, Kevin. Now if you could read the room and make your goddamn speech shorter, that'd be great.

Overall, C-. Terribly boring. It feels very... clumsy? Is probably the best way to put it? and It's so long. It did not need to be this long. I'm looking at the clock and I've spent almost an hour and a half writing this post. Jesus Christ. Good night, and God bless America.

[knowlesian]

I posted 5,713 times in 2022

That's 5,402 more posts than 2021!

745 posts created (13%)

4,968 posts reblogged (87%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@knowlesian

@chuplayswithfire

@spinecorset

@pearwaldorf

@the-stray-liger

I tagged 2,046 of my posts in 2022

#our flag means death - 217 posts

#my ofmd meta - 112 posts

#ofmd spoilers - 99 posts

#the silly/genius intersectional muppet extravaganza - 39 posts

#yellowjackets - 24 posts

#blackbonnet - 16 posts

#the good place - 13 posts

#izzy hands - 11 posts

#oluwande boodhari - 8 posts

#abbott elementary - 7 posts

Longest Tag: 139 characters

#my whole life i’ve always been vaguely confused when i’m like ‘the behavior was shitty’ and people go what you have to understand about the

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

call me crazy but i just think a megacorp buying up and owning all the media and then slowly smashing it together until it’s one giant franchise without end is Bad, Actually

5,010 notes - Posted July 10, 2022

#4

stede bonnet is the elle woods of piracy i will die on this hill

8,428 notes - Posted May 11, 2022

#3

honestly i am lowkey obsessed with how terrible we didn’t start the fire is at being a song while also being among the the catchiest songs ever 

this is a song that includes a man screaming CHILDREN OF THALIDOMIDE and then the next lyric is buddy holly, ben hur / space monkey, mafia

it is just one man, listing historical events more or less in order with no context or end and then layering in a chorus so catchy you will BEG YOUR BRAIN to stop thinking about it

i just appreciate that level of aimless, technically skilled chaos for some reason

eta i know why he wrote it oh god please stop telling me, just because billy joel lived through these events doesn’t make them not historical events and i like the song you don’t have to defend it to me, billy joel even agrees, CHILL

31,215 notes - Posted August 7, 2022

#2

not to be an old cranky leftist but going forward i think those of us who live in the us need to remember a protest is not a group powerwalk to register polite disapproval with those in power

a protest is an implied threat. a protest says there are a lot of us, and we do not like what you’re doing. we are giving you a chance to course correct before we take things to the next level.

if there’s no shared commitment to the potential of moving to that next level: a protest is useless and essentially just public performance art.

43,490 notes - Posted June 24, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

“why do i believe this” and “who benefits from me believing it” are the first steps to decolonization and we should all be doing this more

63,081 notes - Posted June 15, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

[a---fire---inside]

I am not Ukrainian and even though I suffer and get angry and worried every time ruzzians do something bad in Ukraine, which is on a daily basis, because they are monsters, my anger and pain and worry is nothing compared to what Ukrainians feel every second of their lives.

What they don't feel, on the contrary, but I feel very strongly, is shame. Because I feel ashamed every time some Italian ass*ole politician or so-called expert justifies ruzzia's terrorist actions. Or when them and their followers spread telegram based conspiracy bullshit where putin (with his buddy trump even) and ruzzia are the good guys or even victims.

I feel ashamed every time some leftist intellectual sympathizing with ex soviet union and claiming to know better than Eastern European countries that used to be a part of it, blames Nato or the USA for provoking ruzzia into a 'proxy war', completely deleting Ukrainian victims' suffering, or their brave fighters' heroic actions. Or when they call ruzzia's aggression of Ukraine 'conflict', not saying who's the invasor and who's the invaded side. Or when they turn their heads away from destroyed civilian structures, r*ped children, mass graves, and give their support to other causes, other countries, other oppressed populations, preferably that receive no support from the USA/Nato, even better if they oppose the USA/Nato& allies, even better if ruzzia has nothing to do with such 'conflicts' (it's more likely that they are involved but they don't know, as those ass*oles are everywhere).

I feel ashamed every time so-called pacifists whine that the real problem is 'weapons' and ask to stop sending weapons to Ukraine...as if by doing so, by preventing Ukraine from f*cking defending itself and its ppl, ruzzia would automatically stop as well...the same ruzzia that f*cking bombed Kyiv the day the UN secretary was there. Or whining to make peace pls, but only whining to Ukraine, never to f*cking ruzzia itself. Or wondering how they got to that point in 2022, how it's possible to have a war in Europe, not understanding whose fault it is, as if it wasn't clear that ruzzia invaded Crimea first, then Donbas and then went full out invasion of the whole Ukraine.

I feel ashamed every time some impartial or neutral individual feels sorry for Ukrainian ppl having to escape abroad to not be tortured, r*ped and killed by ruzzia's terrorist genocidal actions, but also for ruzzian men escaping mobilization, as if they weren't totally ok with war as long as they weren't forced to do it with their asses out of the sofa and in a tank. Or when NGOs that should be impartial are totally proruzzia instead, minimizing their crimes like IAEA, accusing Ukraine like Amnesty International, or, like Emergency, asking the Italian government to stop sending weapons to Ukraine "for peace", conveniently forgetting that if Ukraine stops fighting Ukraine won't exist anymore, while only if ruzzia stops fighting there will be peace.

The same Emergency, btw, that in 2018 was given the copyright of the song Non Mi Avete FAtto Niente by Ermal Meta and Fabrizio Moro.

Both singers disappointed me very much, saying very vague things against the war, not taking a clear position aganst ruzzia and supporting Ukraine, not getting involved in donation campaigns. And now not taking position against Emergency, which like Amnesty International took ruzzia's side with their affirmations. So now idk if they don't take position bc they want to be safe (in case ruzzia wins? it won't happen anyway. Are they afraid to go against the prorussia higher ups in media, and that this will f*ck their careers? Uhm...), bc they don't care, bc they think it's nato's fault and some more bullshit propaganda theories for intellectuals, bc they are a part of this fake 'pacifist' movement that is totally blind about how ruzzia is behaving and what is happening.

For me it's really shameful and disappointing to know that artists I used to follow, and one I still follow, aren't vocal about this horror. Especially since they wrote a song against terrorism and violence, exactly what ruzzia is doing in Ukraine. Especially since one talks about freedom so much, the same freedom Ukraine is fighting to have back.

For months I told myself that it was impossible that they were indifferent. That probably they were helping in private with donations. Because they are good people...but silence helps the aggressor, and talking about donations spreads awareness among fans, which leads to more donations. Every day I open their ig accounts and see if I missed something, if they said something, because every day something horrible happens in Ukraine and ppl die so if a celebrity just said one vague thing in February it's not enough, attention must be kept high always. But every day I see nothing.

The difference with Maneskin is evident. And I don't even care about Maneskin, but I appreciate their effort supporting Ukraine materially and morally, taking a clear stance and showing their fans where's the right side.

It's not just Meta and Moro, it's clever ppl like Max Gazzé, Daniele Silvestri, Carmen Consoli (who condemned a vague dictator, as if there is only one in the world right now), Paola Turci, Fiorella Mannoia (but she found the time to support Kurdish fighters which is very cool. and it would have been cool to also support Ukraine and condemn ruzzia). It's pretty much the 99% of the Italian music scene, as well as actors and the show business elite.

It's shameful and disappointing.