#dissent and other human rights activities

[etz-ashashiyot]

I know I'm gonna regret posting this, but I just can't not say something: I'm so sick of people who are actively contributing to the ongoing oppression of and violence against Palestinians calling themselves "pro-Palestinian."

In the same way that so many people in the anti-abortion movement are actually pro forced birth rather than pro-child, there are a lot of you who aren't pro-Palestinian, you're just violently antisemitic or in it for yourselves.

If you aren't:

Also angry with the other countries that abuse their Palestinian populations, refuse them citizenship, keep them in displaced person camps under horrific conditions, and/or close their borders entirely to them;

In support of genuine grassroots movements that aim to create some kind of stability, peace, and safety through diplomatic relationships and community building, because that's ""normalization"";

Willing to condemn antisemitism in the diaspora, which helps fuels right-wing rhetoric in Israel;

Willing to shut down lies, propaganda, and disinformation even if it "supports" Palestinians in theory, because lying repeatedly associates the Palestinian movement with lying and makes it harder for survivors to tell their actual stories and be believed outside of the far left movements (and also the truth is bad enough - there's no need to lie);

Willing to focus on practical problem solving over political posturing, especially when it will save Palestinian lives;

Willing to condemn Hamas, which started this most recent disaster, steals aid meant for civilians, uses civilians as human shields, and has been torturing dissenters for years;

Willing to work with Israeli leftists who hate their current government and want peace and full equality for Arab Israelis and their Palestinian neighbors, and also have the best shot at making that change happen; and/or,

Willing to learn about Palestinians as living human beings and value their lives over using them as a political cudgel, whatever that looks like on the ground;

.............then maybe you're more interested in looking radical and jerking off to some fantastical version of The Revolution, and/or hurting Jews than you are in promoting peace, safety, dignity, and self-determination for Palestinians.

Like seriously with "friends" like these, do they even need enemies??

Anyway you should call out the Israeli government for its very real abuses of Palestinians and nothing in this post should be construed otherwise. But if you genuinely care and aren't just in it for internet cool points or leftist cred or feeding your Jew-hate boner or whatever, you gotta prioritize solutions that have a realistic shot at short-term relief and long-term possibility over whatever fits some idealistic goal that will only ever end with more dead Palestinians.

[probablyasocialecologist]

The Guardian has uncovered evidence showing how Israel has relaunched a controversial entity as part of a broader public relations campaign to target US college campuses and redefine antisemitism in US law. Seconds after a smoke alarm subsided during the hearing, Chikli assured the lawmakers that there was new money in the budget for a pushback campaign, which was separate from more traditional public relations and paid advertising content produced by the government. It included 80 programs already under way for advocacy efforts “to be done in the ‘Concert’ way”, he said. The “Concert” remark referred to a sprawling relaunch of a controversial Israeli government program initially known as Kela Shlomo, designed to carry out what Israel called “mass consciousness activities” targeted largely at the US and Europe. Concert, now known as Voices of Israel, previously worked with groups spearheading a campaign to pass so-called “anti-BDS” state laws that penalize Americans for engaging in boycotts or other non-violent protests of Israel. Its latest incarnation is part of a hardline and sometimes covert operation by the Israeli government to strike back at student protests, human rights organizations and other voices of dissent. Voices’ latest activities were conducted through non-profits and other entities that often do not disclose donor information. From October through May, Chikli has overseen at least 32m shekels, or about $8.6m, spent on government advocacy to reframe the public debate.

[...]

Haaretz and the New York Times recently revealed that Chikli’s ministry had tapped a public relations firm to secretly pressure American lawmakers. The firm used hundreds of fake accounts posting pro-Israel or anti-Muslim content on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook and Instagram. (The diaspora affairs ministry denied involvement in the campaign, which reportedly provided about $2m to an Israeli firm for the social media posts.) But that effort is only one of many such campaigns coordinated by the ministry, which has received limited news coverage. The ministry of diaspora affairs and its partners compile weekly reports based on tips from pro-Israel US student groups, some of which receive funding from Israeli government sources. For example, Hillel International, a co-founder of the Israel on Campus Coalition network and one of the largest Jewish campus groups in the world, has reported financial and strategic support from Mosaic United, a public benefit corporation backed by Chikli’s ministry. The longstanding partnership is now being utilized to shape the political debate over Israel’s war. In February, Hillel’s chief executive, Adam Lehman, appeared before the Knesset to discuss the strategic partnership with Mosaic and the ministry of diaspora affairs, which he said had already produced results.

24 June 2024

[tanadrin]

RE "revolutionary leftists are revolutionary because they know they can't win electorally."

It astounds me a little that there are leftists who think that a communist revolution is more likely to work than, like, fifty years of community-building and electoral politics. Sewer socialism, union activism, and other boring activities have brought much more success in the U.S. than agitation for a revolution.

What I mean is, setting aside the moral concerns (violence is bad, even when it's necessary, and if there are practical alternatives then we should pursue them), I am not a revolutionary leftist because I think we would lose a revolution. For one thing, there is a considerable right-wing element in the country that is much better prepared for this kind of thing, and I think that the majority of the institutions in the U.S. would pick fascism over communism if they had to choose, but also, prolonged violent action is ripe for breeding authoritarianism.

Goatse is concerned that "the party" might "abandon or neglect its primary ends," but what is leftism if it is not, at bottom, an attempt to improve the living conditions of all people, et cetera et cetera? To the extent that social democratic parties successfully pursue this end to some degree, they're better than than an ostensible communist party that talks the talk but commits human rights abuses. And, more than the fact that U.S. leftism has some pretty fierce opposition that would probably fare better if The Revolution happened tomorrow, I think that, even in winning, we would lose, because what came out the other end would look a lot more like Stalinism.

I think one thing the hardcore revolutionaries in OECD countries don't realize is that the reason they can't marshal support for their revolutions is that the socialists won most of the issues that were salient in the early 20th century--workers got more rights, better pay, unions were legalized, etc., etc. But it didn't take restructuring the whole political economy to do it, which is immensely frustrating if you believe that any society without your ideal political economy is inherently immoral and impure, so in order to justify an explicitly communist platform you have to rhetorically isolate it from the filthy libs and feckless demsocs who it turns out have been pretty effective within the arena of electoral politics in which supposedly nothing can ever get done, and treat them as of a piece with the out-and-out fascists and royalist autocrats of the 1920s and 30s.

Which, you know. Is not persuasive to most people! Most people understand intuitively the vast gulf between the SPD and the Nazis; they see that, milquetoast and compromising though they may be, the center-left can deliver substantive policy improvements without the upheaval of a civil war or political purges, and this is attractive to people who are not of a millenarian or left-authoritarian personality.

Which isn't to say that communists don't often make important points! It sucks having to fight a constant rearguard action against the interests of capital rolling back the social improvements of the 20th century, and it sucks that liberal governments in Europe and North America have historically been quite happy to bankroll and logistically support fascists and tyrants in the third world against communist movements (which invariably only exist as communist movements because these same fascists and tyrants have crushed more compromising movements and only the most militant organizations have managed to survive).

But I agree with you: communists also talk a big game about how liberalism is the real fascism (what's that line from Disco Elysium I see quoted everywhere about how everybody is secretly a fascist except the other communists, who are liberals?), while also being awful at democracy. Suppressing dissent because your small clique of political elites is the only legitimate expression of the people's will (which you know, because you have declared it to be so) really is some rank bullshit. A system with competitive elections is still, well, a system with competitive elections, even if those elections are structurally biased in certain ways; all the bloviating that attempts to justify communist authoritarianism cannot really obscure the fact that authoritarian systems are cruel and brittle, regardless of the ideology being served.

[horreurscopes]

So, I could be out-of-bounds here since I think you meant it as dark humor, but what did you mean in the tags of that 'israel-hamas war' post? I suspect you(and op) are criticizing that framing because Israel is obviously demolishing much more than 'Hamas'(and probably doing a terrible job of actually targeting terrorists- they seem content to reduce Gaza to rubble even if the brass of Hamas escapes). I'm guessing that by saying "joining the Israel-Hamas war on the side of Hamas" you mean, if they're going to conflate Palestinians with Hamas unilaterally, then you're saying, whatever the media wants to call Palestinian civilians- you still support them. I am asking anyways though bc, given reports of increasing antisemitic activity in the US and Europe, I am worried about the potential for blurring lines between the cause of Palestinian civilians and the alt-right individuals who are likely masking their antisemitism in the context of being anti-Zionist. Although Israel's government has been the source of Palestinian loss for decades, (it seems to me that) even joking about supporting terrorism is enough to reinforce the persuasion that Israeli/Palestinian Jews and Palestinian Arabs must be mutually-exclusive peoples. I don't think it's fully rational per se(tho I'm not claiming to have all the relevant information myself, and I'm white US American goyim so like- grain of salt-), but I think that existential fear is the incredible hurdle facing Zionist Jews. (Idc too much about the opinions of non-Jewish Zionists bc I don't grant that they are dealing with the same emotional complications at this time, although that doesn't stop me from arguing w my acquaintances abt their callous acceptance of US/Israeli propaganda.) I just think..... isn't it overall harmful to allow anti-semitic rhetoric, even used sarcastically, to enter the genuine humanist cause for Palestinian liberation? Or, have I misunderstood, and you actually are not in opposition to Hamas, or something else I didn't think of?

hi! thank you for approaching the question thoughtfully and with curiosity, i really appreciate it. i was being kind of flippant with that meme, but this is the only ask i'm going to reply to on the matter given that i am neither jewish nor arab, so i'm going to answer in earnest:

hamas is a political resistance movement with an armed wing, much like the black panthers party was, and like the bpp, a large part of the organization is dedicated to social welfare and civic restoration.

they have stated that they are not against judaism, but against the zionist project. they openly support political solutions.

labeling hamas a terrorist group is a propaganda tactic used by the united states and israel to justify the horrors of settler colonization.

hamas is palestine, a part of it, even if palestinians like any other demographic on earth, are not a unified, single-minded people. to declare hamas a separate entity falls prey to the imperialist lie that there is an enemy to fight "fairly" within the people they are displacing and exterminating.

am i rejoicing in the deaths of israelis? of course not. killing civilians and taking civilian hostages is a war crime, whether it is committed by the opresor or the oppressed. the israeli government is not its people, and many jews, within israel as well as in the US, are bravely risking their lives to publicly dissent the criminal acts of the israeli government. all loss of human life is a tragedy.

no one should ever be faced with the choice between annihilation and murderous violence after exhausting all other forms of peaceful protest and being massacred like animals.

but why is it that we consider a resistance group formed within a population with a median age of eighteen a terrorist group, and not the IDF, a US-backed military force with an annual budget of twenty billion dollars?

i am currently reading hamas and civil society in gaza by sara roy to learn more about hamas and the history of israel in palestine. i'll remember to post more excerpts which i am admittedly terrible at.

but all of the information above can be found by reading wikipedia. investigating with duckduckgo searches (not gonna pretend google isn't prioritizing propaganda, to be fair), and reading reliable news coverage like aljazeera and the many journalists who are at risk of, or have lost their lives, reporting on the ground.

i have also appreciated reading posts from @determinate-negation @opencommunion @fairuzfan @ibtisams and @bloglikeanegyptian amongst others

in conclusion:

[thatsonemorbidcorvid]

“Many of the women in Heterodoxy moved in corresponding circles and maintained similar beliefs. They were “veterans of social reform efforts,” writes Scutts in Hotbed, and they belonged to “leagues, associations, societies and organizations of all stripes.” A large number were public figures—influential lawyers, journalists, playwrights or physicians, some of whom were the only women in their fields—and often had their names in the papers for the work they were performing. Many members were also involved in a wide variety of women’s rights issues, from promoting the use of birth control to advocating for immigrant mothers.

Heterodoxy met every other Saturday to discuss such issues and see how members might collaborate and cultivate networks of reform. Gatherings were considered a safe space for women to talk, exchange ideas and take action.”

In the early 20th century, New York City’s Greenwich Village earned a reputation as America’s bohemia, a neighborhood where everyone from artists and poets to activists and organizers came to pursue their dreams.

“In the Village, it was so easy to bump into great minds, to go from one restaurant to another, to a meeting house, to work for a meeting or to a gallery,” says Joanna Scutts, author of Hotbed: Bohemian Greenwich Village and the Secret Club That Sparked Modern Feminism. Here was a community where rents were still affordable, creative individuality thrived, urban diversity and radical experiments were the norm, and bohemian dissenters could come and go as they pleased.

Such a neighborhood was the ideal breeding ground for Heterodoxy, a secret society that paved the way for modern feminism. The female debating club’s name referred to the many unorthodox women among its members. These individuals “questioned forms of orthodoxy in culture, in politics, in philosophy—and in sexuality,” noted ThoughtCo. in 2017.

Born as part of the initial wave of modern feminism that emerged during the 19th and early 20th centuries with suffrage at its center, the radical ideologies debated at Heterodoxy gatherings extended well beyond the scope of a women’s right to vote. In fact, Heterodoxy had only one requirement for membership: that a woman “not be orthodox in her opinion.”

“The Heterodoxy club and the work that it did was very much interconnected with what was going on in the neighborhood,” says Andrew Berman, executive director of Village Preservation, a nonprofit dedicated to documenting and preserving the distinct heritage of Greenwich Village. “With the suffrage movement already beginning to crest, women had started considering how they could free themselves from the generations and generations of structures that had been placed upon them.”

Unitarian minister Marie Jenney Howe founded Heterodoxy in 1912, two years after she and her husband, progressive reformer Frederic C. Howe, moved to the Village. “Howe was already in her 40s,” says Scutts, “and just got to know people through her husband’s professional connections, and during meetings and networks where progressive groups were very active at the time.”

Howe’s mindset on feminism was clear: “We intend simply to be ourselves,” she once said, “not just our little female selves, but our whole big human selves.”

Many of the women in Heterodoxy moved in corresponding circles and maintained similar beliefs. They were “veterans of social reform efforts,” writes Scutts in Hotbed, and they belonged to “leagues, associations, societies and organizations of all stripes.” A large number were public figures—influential lawyers, journalists, playwrights or physicians, some of whom were the only women in their fields—and often had their names in the papers for the work they were performing. Many members were also involved in a wide variety of women’s rights issues, from promoting the use of birth control to advocating for immigrant mothers.

Heterodoxy met every other Saturday to discuss such issues and see how members might collaborate and cultivate networks of reform. Gatherings were considered a safe space for women to talk, exchange ideas and take action. Jessica Campbell, a visual artist whose exhibition on Heterodoxy is currently on display at Philadelphia’s Fabric Workshop and Museum, says, “Their meetings were taking place without any kind of recording or public record. It was this privacy that allowed the women to speak freely.”

Scutts adds, “The freedom to disagree was very important to them.”

With 25 charter members, Heterodoxy included individuals of diverse backgrounds, including lesbian and bisexual women, labor radicals and socialites, and artists and nurses. Meetings were often held in the basement of Polly’s, a MacDougal Street hangout established by anarchist Polly Holladay. Here, at what Berman calls a “sort of nexus for progressive, artistic, intellectual and political thought,” the women would gather at wooden tables to discuss issues like fair employment and fair wages, reproductive rights, and the antiwar movement. The meetings often went on for hours, with each typically revolving around a specific subject determined in advance.

Reflecting on these get-togethers later in life, memoirist Mabel Dodge Luhan described them as gatherings of “fine, daring, rather joyous and independent women, … women who did things and did them openly.”

Occasionally, Heterodoxy hosted guest speakers, like modern birth control pioneer Margaret Sanger, who later became president of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, and anarchist Emma Goldman, known for championing everything from free love to the right of labor to organize.

While the topics discussed at each meeting remained confidential, many of Heterodoxy’s members were quite open about their involvement with the club. “Before I’d even heard of Heterodoxy,” says Scutts, “I had been working in the New-York Historical Society, researching for an [exhibition on] how radical politics had influenced a branch of the suffrage movement. That’s when I began noticing many of the same women’s names in overlapping causes. I then realized that they were all associated with this particular club.”

These women included labor lawyer, suffragist, socialist and journalist Crystal Eastman, who in 1920 co-founded the American Civil Liberties Union to defend the rights of all people nationwide, and playwright Susan Glaspell, a key player in the development of modern American theater.

Other notable alumni were feminist icon Charlotte Perkins Gilman, whose 1892 short story, “The Yellow Wallpaper,” illustrates the mental and physical struggles associated with postpartum depression, and feminist psychoanalyst Beatrice M. Hinkle, the first woman physician in the United States to hold a public health position. Lou Rogers, the suffrage cartoonist whose work was used as a basis for the design of Wonder Woman, was a member of Heterodoxy, as was Jewish socialist activist Rose Pastor Stokes.

Grace Nail Johnson, an advocate for civil rights and an influential figure in the Harlem Renaissance, was Heterodoxy’s only Black member. Howe “had personally written to and invited her,” says Scutts, “as sort of a representation of her race. It’s an unusual case, because racial integration was quite uncommon at the time.”

While exceptions did exist, the majority of Heterodoxy’s members were middle class or wealthy, and the bulk of them had obtained undergraduate degrees—still very much a rarity for women in the early 20th century. Some even held graduate degrees in fields like medicine, law and the social sciences. These were women with the leisure time to participate in political causes, says Scutts, and who could afford to take risks, both literally and figuratively. But while political activism and the ability to discuss topics overtly were both part of Heterodoxy’s overall ethos, most of its members were decidedly left-leaning, and almost all were radical in their ideologies. “Even if the meetings promoted an openness to disagree,” says Scutts, “it wasn’t like these were women from across the political spectrum.”

Rather, they were women who inspired and spurred each other on. For example, about one-third of the club’s members were divorced—a process that was still “incredibly difficult, expensive and even scandalous” at the time, says Scutts. The club acted as somewhat of a support network for them, “just by the virtue of having people around you that are saying, ‘I’ve gone through the process. You can, too, and survive.’”

According to Campbell, Heterodoxy’s new inductees were often asked to share a story about their upbringing with the club’s other members. This approach “helped to break down barriers that might otherwise be there due to their ranging political views and professional allegiances,” the artist says.

The Heterodoxy club usually went on hiatus during the summer months, when members relocated to places like Provincetown, Massachusetts, a seasonal outpost for Greenwich Village residents. As the years progressed, meetings eventually moved to Tuesdays, and the club began changing shape, becoming less radical in tandem with the Village’s own shifting energy. Women secured the right to vote with the ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920, displacing the momentum that fueled the suffrage movement; around this same time, the Red Scare saw the arrests and deportations of unionists and immigrants. Rent prices in the neighborhood also increased dramatically, driving out the Village’s bohemian spirit. As the club’s core members continued aging, Heterodoxy became more about continuing friendships than debating radical ideologies.

“These women were not all young when they started to meet,” says Scutts in the “Lost Ladies of Lit” podcast. “You know, it’s 20, 30 years later, and so they stayed in touch, but they never really found the second generation or third generation to keep it going in a new form.”

By the early 1940s, the biweekly meetings of Heterodoxy were no more. Still, the club’s legacy lives on, even beyond the scope of modern feminism.

“These days, it’s so easy to dehumanize people when you’re only hearing one facet of their belief system,” says Campbell. “But the ability to change your mind and debate freely like the women of Heterodoxy, without any public record? It’s an interesting model for rethinking the way we talk about problems and interact with other people today.”

[confused-rat]

A Rat’s List of 50 Villain’s that had a Point

So beforehand, here’s Lily’s dumbass fucking rules for the list. 

Have a point 

Successfully navigate still being a villain

Are written well

From other lists I’ve seen, I think some people have either misinterpreted or ignored the “have a point” bit. (Or maybe I have.) Having a point means the villain was correct on a certain issue, but otherwise failed with their handling of it. (Leading to the second rule, is still a villain despite having a valid point.) So I’m going to try and explain what issue each villain I’ve listed was correct on, and why they’re still a villain. 

But I’m also ignoring rule 3. Because it’s stupid. ☺️ Spoilers inbound.

Ardyn Izunia, FFXV — The point, the gods ruined his life and to correct their mistakes, set up a prophecy that would ruin/kill countless other lives in the process, forcing everyone into roles they had not consented to. Why he’s still the villain, lost himself in the role he was forced into, killing needlessly and mentally torturing others for the dramatics. 

Emet-Selch, FFXIV — The point, the world is a fractured existence, where its inhabitants live infinitely shorter and arguably strife-filled lives, their souls 1/14 of what they originally were. Reality itself is broken. Why he’s still a villain, mortals still have the right to live and better themselves and if fixing the world means mass genocide across 14 different versions of reality, maybe let it stay broken?

Nidhogg, FFXIV — The point, the Ishgardians renege on their alliance and unjustly slew his sister for power, eventually rewriting their own history to place the blame on the dragons to justify their centuries long war. Why he’s still bad, genocide is never the answer. Also was just tossing hatchlings out to war to satisfy his own hatred.

Zodiark, FFXIV — The point, was created to stop the end of the world. Did that. Quite successfully for thousands of years. Why was it still bad though? Because it was gonna sacrifice millions to fulfill the wishes of its summoners after the fact. (See: Emet-Selch)

Vayne & Venat, FFXII — The point, humanity was being controlled by fantasy mindflayers, who routinely destroyed nations to keep their status quo. Vayne and Venat wished to free humanity from them, unfortunately, they decided to do that by invading and conquering other countries and killing thousands. 

Megatron, TFA — The point, Cybertron created his people as a slave race for war and denied them basic rights. Why is he still a villain, thinks colonizing and genocide is needed to provide for his people.

Megatron, IDW — The point, Cybertron’s government was a functionalistic hellscape where dissent was punished with anything from brainwashing to amputation. Why is he still a villain, lost the plot and murdered millions, innocents who were victims of the same system he was, eventually was guilty of the same crimes as the people he originally fought against.

Megatron, TFP — The point, another functionalist society, one where dissenters were sent to gladiator pits. Why is he still a villain, became essentially a terrorist when he bombed a theme park and later whole cities, again murdering fellow victims. 

Silco, Arcane — The point, despite being ruled by the same government, the Undercity received no support from Piltover and was left poverty stricken and oppressed. Zaun deserved its independence. Silco, however, is a drug lord, so he’s still a villain.

Count Dooku, Star Wars — The point, the Jedi Council and Republic were actually corrupt. Why he’s still the villain, worked with the absolute worst person in the galaxy. He tried to fight fire with an active volcano, very not smart.

The Architect, Dragon Age: Awakening — The point, was trying to give darkspawn and other blighted creatures back their self-awareness and control, eventually stopping the Blights entirely. Why he’s still the villain, abducted Grey Wardens to drain of blood and experiment on to achieve his goals. 

Teyrn Logain, Dragon Age: Origins — The point, Orlais was actually trying to secretly conquer Fereldan through a political marriage to King Cailan. Why he’s still the villain, let hundreds of his own people die to secure the throne, including the Grey Wardens, who had nothing to do with Orlais’ plans. 

Solas, Dragon Age: Inquisition — THE POINT, WHICH HE DID HAVE, both times he fucked with the Veil, he was trying to essentially stop an unjust social hierarchal system that supported slavery. Why he’s still the villain, he admitted it would likely kill a lot of people and we do not want that actually? 

Handsome Jack, Borderlands 2 — The point, Pandora is FUCKED. It needs some kind of intervention, people are wearing face masks made of FACES. Why he’s still a villain, it’s. It’s Handsome Jack? He airlocks people for fun, and that’s TAME compared to the other shit he’s done. 

Colonel T. Zarpedon, Borderlands the Pre-Sequel — The point, wanted to prevent the powers of the Vault from being misused. (Points at Borderlands 2 and 3) How she’s still the villain, decides to blow up the moon and all the people on it to do so.

Akechi Goro, Persona 5 — The point, Shido was a vile person who appeared to be above the law as he used his influence to ruin countless lives. Why Goro’s still the villain, murdering innocents in a long-con revenge plot isn’t justified. 

Louis Guiabern, Metaphor: Refantazio — The point, he’s essentially trying to end fantasy racism. Why he’s still bad, his solution to ending said fantasy racism is nonconsensual body modification on a worldwide scale. 

The Flame Emperor, Fire Emblem: Three Houses — The point, the church was corrupt and allowed atrocities to be committed to meet its status quo. Working with arguably worse people (reluctantly) and allowing other atrocities to occur to defeat said church is still bad though.

Miquella, Elden Ring — The point, the Golden Order is flawed and shunned many of the Lands’ Between’s inhabitants. Why he’s still the villain, you can’t brainwash an entire country into being nice, that’s insane. 

Shadowlord, Nier: Gestalt/Replicant — The point, oh man, where do I fucking begin? Shades are all just disembodied souls trying to reunite with their clone vessels. If they don’t reunite, said vessels will eventually die, as both are connected. Unfortunately, the clone vessels gained sentience, dooming humanity. The Shadowlord is just trying to save his daughter/sister, but he’s essentially sacrificing another version of her to do this with neither’s consent. No bueno. 

The Wicked Witch of the West, Wizard of Oz — The point, Dorothy totally did steal her sister’s shoes off her corpse. The death was accidental, but the theft was deliberate. Theft isn’t a murdering offense though, also Toto was just a dog? Wtf. Still a villain.  

The Gnome King, Return to Oz — The point, the Emerald City did in fact steal all his emeralds. Why he’s still the villain, sore loser. Tried to eat a child. 

Shere Khan, the Jungle Book (LA) — The point, mankind sucks. That is all…. Also the wolves totally broke the rules by keeping Mowgli, they could’ve just dropped him off at a village. Why he’s still the villain, preferred child murder to relocation. 

Maleficent, Sleeping Beauty — The point, you do not FUCK with the Fae? Don’t be rude? Why she’s a villain, did not stop after making her point. Sore loser. Cursed the baby instead of the rude parents. 

Ursula, the Little Mermaid — The point, technically, Ariel made a deal with the witch of her own free will. Why she’s still the villain, also a sore loser. Sabotaged Ariel to get the trident. Not a girls girl. Boo.

The Creature, Frankenstein — The point, was shunned and ostracized by literally everyone, including the man who created him, for something beyond his control. Victor owed him (child support). Why he’s still a villain, literally killed a child to spite his creator. He literally. Killed a child. And framed the nursemaid. To torment Victor. He also threatens all Victor’s friends and family, innocent people who had NO HAND in his creation. 

Dracula, Netflix’s Castlevania — The point, radical religious zealots killed his wife (and others) unprovoked. Why is he still a villain, did not stop at the zealots. (This iteration isn’t a predator, you empty-headed fuck ass, as a MLP enjoyer, you should understand the concept of MULTIPLE VERSIONS OF ONE CHARACTER??)

Lucian, Underworld Trilogy — The point, werewolves were slaves and fantasy racism got his lover and unborn child killed. Why he’s still the villain, kidnapped and helped experiment on countless people (who also died) to create a hybrid to facilitate his revenge. 

Red Queen, Resident Evil — The point, she was literally stopping the zombie infection from breaching contamination and destroying the entire world. Why she’s still the villain, told nobody, explained nothing, boom laser hallway. 

Ozymandias, Watchmen — The point, literally just watch the movie. Dude united global powers and ended a Cold War by creating a fake obstacle to scare them, but that’s bad because he killed a lot of people to do that. 

The Count, Gankutsuou — The point, he was unjustly convicted by three corrupt men who abused their positions of power and got away scott-free for years. Still bad because he dragged many innocent people into his revenge plot. Franz did NOT deserve all that. 

Knives, Trigun Stampede — The point, humanity destroyed their own planet and was actively using his people as portable life support batteries and slowly killing them. Why he’s still the villain, genocide is not a valid solution. 

Kyubey, Madoka Magica — Fuck you Lily, Kyubey isn’t a psychopath, it’s a manipulative little shit that doesn’t have humanity’s morals. The point, the universe is dying and they’re trying to stop that. Why they’re still the villain, their solution was the emotional and physical torture of children in a never-ending cycle of despair of death. 

Bandit King Bakura, Yu Gi Oh — The point, the then Pharaoh literally massacred his entire village to create the Millennium Items. Why he’s still the villain, once you fuse with a Great God of Evil, it’s kinda hard to argue for your continued righteous vengeance. 

Shōgo Makishima, Psycho Pass — The point, the Sybil System is flawed, criminalizing innocent people while letting dangerous sociopaths like him walk free (until they get brain jarred). Why he’s still the villain, he decided to demonstrate the system’s flaws by orchestrating so. many. murders. Like. So many. 

Luke Castellans, PJO — The point, the Gods didn’t care for their kids equally and left many to fend for themselves. Why he’s still the villain, trying to murder your fellow campers cause they won’t join your cause is bad actually. 

Medusa, PJO — The point, was unfairly cursed while Poseidon got away scott-free. Why she’s still DEFINITELY a villain, turns innocent people to stone, was gonna turn a child because she’s still not over her ex, getting dealt a raw hand doesn’t excuse CHILD MURDER. 

Poseidon, Odyssey — The point, Odysseus could’ve just avoided all this if he had just killed Poseidon’s son. 🤷 Why he’s still the villain, he would’ve raised the tides so high that all of Ithaca would’ve died, cause he had beef with ONE (1) MORTAL MAN. 

Lord Cutler Beckett, Pirates of the Caribbean — The point, uhhh. This may come as a surprise, but. Pirates… bad? Why he’s still a villain, he did not stop at pirates. Blackmailed and killed basically bystanders. ACAB. 

The Bane, The Underland Chronicles — The point, the Underlanders were originally a colonizing force that poisoned and killed the original inhabitants of the caves they took for their own. Why he’s still a villain, HE EATS PEOPLE? Many of the species underground are sentient and HE EATS THEM?

Tsaritsa/Fatui, Genshin Impact — The point, Celestia has a chokehold on humanity, controlling people’s fates and harshly punishing any dissent. They need to be stopped. Why they’re still villains, essentially is fighting fire with fire, manipulating Nations and experimenting on/killing folks to pursue their own goals to topple Celestia. 

Tsumugi Shirogane, Danganronpa V3 — The point, just doing her job, allegedly the entire class signed up willingly to play the Death Game. Why she’s still the villain, broke her own rules, also, cool motive, still murder?

Chris Walker, Outlast — The point, is trying to keep a highly dangerous swarm of nanites from breaking containment. Why he’s still the villain, does this by breaking others’ spines. And necks. And everything really.

Charioce XVII, Rage of Bahamut: Virgin Soul — The point, Bahamut is a world ending threat that almost succeeded two separate times in the past, and was guaranteed to awaken again in the imminent future to finish the job. Charioce wanted to stop it. However, waging a war with Heaven and enslaving the demon race to build a weapon to combat it was an awful way to go about it.

William Moriarty, Moriarty the Patriot — The point, England’s class system was allowing the rich to get away with absolutely abhorrent crimes. Murder is still murder though. 

Azure Lion, Lego Monkie Kid — The point, the celestial realm really doesn’t care about the mortal realm and is arguably very corrupt. Why he’s still a villain, broke the universe despite multiple people telling him to Not Do That. 

Toffee, SVTFOE — The point, wanted to get rid of magic, which kind of did fuck a lot of people over. Why he’s still the villain, child murder 🎶 is not 🎶 okay! 🎶

Oropo, Wakfu — The point, sought to replace seemingly uncaring gods with their abandoned offspring. Why he’s still the villain, was going to nuke the world to topple said gods. 

Julith, Dofus — The point, was unjustly framed for the murder of her lover because of fantasy racism. Why she is still the villain, sacrificing a stadium’s worth of souls to bring back your deceased lover is not okay.  

Prince Nuada, Hellboy 2 — The point, humanity had forgotten its truce with the Fae and was actively poisoning the planet. Dooming Nuada’s people and other creatures to a slow death and extinction. Why he’s still bad, genocide 👏 is not 👏 a valid 👏 solution!!

[ikiyou]

Thoughts about democracy and my blog

So I hadn't really planned on continuing a lot of 'political' posts past the election...had the outcome been different.

But here we are, and some of the intentions in Trump's Project 2025 might become reality.

And anyone who follows me probably knows how I feel about the election, given all my posts today. I'm sure a large percentage of my followers feel the same way.

It is our civic duty - all of ours - to stand up for democracy and human rights in whatever way we are capable. Since I live overseas, I cannot join my local school board or help my local library.

The only thing I can do is continue to post where I have an audience, so that people can remain educated.

However, I never intended that this blog be anything but a BSD haven. And I don't want that to change. But to start a blog for 'political' purposes would undermine the efforts of democracy and education, because only politically minded people would follow such a blog, and I would be posting in a useless echo chamber.

But in deference to the people who follow me, you likely do so only for BSD content. So if I make other posts, I will probably give them a tag, like democracy, or something, so you can filter them out if you don't want to see them.

But to those who are interested, many probably also believe in the same things I believe: human rights, democracy, creative freedoms. Speaking to you would also be speaking to an echo chamber.

The problem with democratic activism is finding a way to speak to those who don't share your beliefs. And, like a business, you either need to sell them what they want, or convince them they want what you're selling.

In Harris's case, that would have meant convincing voters that the economy would be great again under the Democrats.

Talking about the more important issues, like human rights, isn't of interest to the people whose votes really matter.

And yet, it is still vitally important to document and explain actions, impacts, and trends of what has been happening and what may happen.

And further still, some of those actions may target our creative and fandom freedoms. Voices like Trump's want to silence dissent, LGBT topics, and other creative expression (whump, dark fic, etc). The possibility exists for freedom of speech to be attacked. A03 is only protected as long as we protect freedom of speech and creativity.

So, these democratic issues have an impact on us as members of the BSD fandom. If BSD has meaning for you, so too does democracy and freedom.

So, I will probably continue to write about the things that will happen in the US when able, or to reblog better written and timely posts about it. I am well aware these posts will get little to no traction here - not only is it an echo chamber, those posts never do well. But then again, most of what I post gets little engagement.

But the only thing we can do is try.

[odinsblog]

For over two decades, President Vladimir Putin has squeezed dissent in Russia. Critics, journalists, and defectors have faced dire consequences after opposing him. From poisonings to shootings, mysterious falls from windows, and even plane crashes, there is a long trail of silenced voices.

Alexei Navalny, whose death in prison is as yet unexplained, had previously fallen ill on a flight from Siberia to Moscow in 2020 after being poisoned with Novichok, a nerve agent. Alexander Litvinenko, a former Russian spy who defected and was a prominent Putin critic, was murdered with polonium-210 in London in 2016.

Other deaths of opposition figures under Putin's rule also appear to follow a pattern. Boris Nemtsov, shot dead near the Kremlin, and Stanislav Markelov, assassinated in Moscow alongside journalist Anastasia Baburova, are just two examples. Natalia Estemirova, abducted and found dead in Chechnya, and Anna Politkovskaya, an investigative journalist murdered in her Moscow apartment building, also paid the ultimate price following their dissent.

Here are 10 prominent Putin critics who have died in assassinations or mysterious circumstances.

Alexei Navalny

Date of death: February 16, 2024

Cause of Death: Alexei Navalny died in prison. The Russian prison service reported that he felt unwell after a walk and lost consciousness.

Biography: Alexei Navalny was a prominent critic of Vladimir Putin. He gained global attention in 2020 when he survived a poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok. Navalny willingly returned to Russia from Germany in 2021, where he had received treatment for the previous poisoning. Upon his return, he was promptly arrested. Navalny was known for exposing corruption, investigating Putin's inner circle, and leading anti-Kremlin opposition movements. His death is likely to be seen by fellow opposition members as a political assassination attributable to Putin, but is as yet unexplained.

Mikhail Lesin

Age: 57

Date of Death: November 5, 2015

Cause of Death: Mikhail Lesin was a former Russian press minister and media executive. He fell out of favor with Putin and faced scrutiny for his wealth. Lesin was found dead in a Washington, D.C. hotel room. The official cause of death was ruled as accidental blunt force injuries, but questions persist about the circumstances.

Boris Nemtsov

Age: 55

Date of Death: February 27, 2015

Cause of Death: Boris Nemtsov was shot dead on a bridge near the Kremlin. His murder remains unsolved, but many believe it was politically motivated. Nemtsov was a vocal critic of Putin's government, advocating for democracy, human rights, and transparency. He served as a deputy prime minister under President Boris Yeltsin and later became a prominent opposition figure.

Boris Berezovsky

Age: 67

Date of Death: March 23, 2013

Cause of Death: Boris Berezovsky was a wealthy businessman, oligarch, and former ally of Putin. However, he became a vocal critic and fled to the U.K. Berezovsky was found dead in his home in Berkshire, England. The official cause of death was ruled as suicide, but suspicions remain due to his high-profile opposition activities.

Sergei Magnitsky

Age: 37

Date of Death: November 16, 2009

Cause of Death: Sergei Magnitsky was a lawyer and auditor who exposed a massive tax fraud scheme involving Russian officials. He was arrested, imprisoned, and denied medical treatment. Magnitsky died in custody following severe beatings and medical neglect. His death led to the passing of the Magnitsky Act in the United States, which sanctions Russian officials involved in human rights abuses and corruption.

Stanislav Markelov

Age: 34

Date of Death: January 19, 2009

Cause of Death: Stanislav Markelov was a human rights lawyer and journalist. He was assassinated in Moscow by a gunman who also killed journalist Anastasia Baburova. Markelov had represented victims of human rights abuses and criticized the Russian government's actions in Chechnya. His death raised concerns about the safety of those opposing the regime.

Anastasia Baburova

Age: 25

Date of Death: January 19, 2009

Cause of Death: Anastasia Baburova, a journalist and activist, was shot dead alongside human rights lawyer Stanislav Markelov in Moscow. She had reported on neo-Nazi groups and political violence. Her murder remains unsolved, but it is believed to be connected to her activism.

Natalia Estemirova

Age: 50

Date of Death: July 15, 2009

Cause of Death: Natalia Estemirova, a human rights activist and journalist, was abducted in Grozny, Chechnya, and found dead later that day. She had documented human rights violations in Chechnya and criticized the government. Her murder remains unsolved, but it is widely believed to be connected to her activism and criticism of the Chechen authorities.

Anna Politkovskaya

Age: 48

Date of Death: October 7, 2006

Cause of Death: Anna Politkovskaya, an investigative journalist, was shot dead in her apartment building in Moscow. She had reported extensively on human rights abuses, corruption, and the war in Chechnya. Her work was critical of Putin's government, and her murder sparked international outrage. Despite investigations, the masterminds behind her killing have not been brought to justice.

Yuri Shchekochikhin

Age: 53

Date of Death: July 3, 2003

Cause of Death: Yuri Shchekochikhin was a journalist, writer, and member of the Russian State Duma. He investigated corruption, organized crime, and human rights abuses. Shchekochikhin suddenly fell ill and died from an unknown cause. Some suspect poisoning, but the circumstances remain unclear.

(continue reading)

List of journalists killed in Russia

The dangers to journalists in Russia have been known since the early 1990s but concern over the number of unsolved killings soared after Anna Politkovskaya's murder in Moscow on 7 October 2006. While international monitors mentioned a dozen deaths, some sources within Russia talked of over two hundred fatalities.

2009 reports on deaths of journalists in Russia: In June 2009, a wide-ranging investigation by the International Federation of Journalists into the deaths of journalists in Russia was published. At the same time, the IFJ launched an online database which documents over three hundred deaths and disappearances since 1993.

(continue reading)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Lee Fang and Jack Poulson at The Guardian:

Last November, just weeks into the war in Gaza, Amichai Chikli, a brash, 42-year-old Likud minister in the Israeli government, was called into the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, to brief lawmakers on what could be done about rising anti-war protests from young people across the United States, especially at elite universities. “I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again now, that I think we should, especially in the United States, be on the offensive,” argued Chikli. Chikli has since led a targeted push to counter critics of Israel. The Guardian has uncovered evidence showing how Israel has relaunched a controversial entity as part of a broader public relations campaign to target US college campuses and redefine antisemitism in US law. Seconds after a smoke alarm subsided during the hearing, Chikli assured the lawmakers that there was new money in the budget for a pushback campaign, which was separate from more traditional public relations and paid advertising content produced by the government. It included 80 programs already under way for advocacy efforts “to be done in the ‘Concert’ way”, he said.

The “Concert” remark referred to a sprawling relaunch of a controversial Israeli government program initially known as Kela Shlomo, designed to carry out what Israel called “mass consciousness activities” targeted largely at the US and Europe. Concert, now known as Voices of Israel, previously worked with groups spearheading a campaign to pass so-called “anti-BDS” state laws that penalize Americans for engaging in boycotts or other non-violent protests of Israel. Its latest incarnation is part of a hardline and sometimes covert operation by the Israeli government to strike back at student protests, human rights organizations and other voices of dissent.

Voices’ latest activities were conducted through non-profits and other entities that often do not disclose donor information. From October through May, Chikli has overseen at least 32m shekels, or about $8.6m, spent on government advocacy to reframe the public debate. It didn’t take long for one of the American advocacy groups closely coordinating with Chikli’s ministry, the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, or ISGAP, to score a powerful victory. In a widely viewed December congressional hearing on alleged antisemitism among student anti-war protesters, several House GOP lawmakers explicitly cited ISGAP research in their interrogations of university presidents. The hearing concluded with Representative Elise Stefanik’s viral confrontation with the then president of Harvard University, Claudine Gay, who later retired from her role after a wave of negative news coverage.

[...] Other American groups tied to Voices have pursued a range of initiatives to bolster support for the state of Israel. One such group listed publicly as a partner, the National Black Empowerment Council (NBEC), published an open letter from Black Democratic politicians pledging solidarity with Israel. Another group, CyberWell, a pro-Israel anti-disinformation group led by former Israeli military intelligence and Voices officials, has established itself as an official “trusted partner” to TikTok and Meta, helping both social platforms screen and edit content. A recent CyberWell report called for Meta to suppress the popular slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”.

[...] Haaretz and the New York Times recently revealed that Chikli’s ministry had tapped a public relations firm to secretly pressure American lawmakers. The firm used hundreds of fake accounts posting pro-Israel or anti-Muslim content on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook and Instagram. (The diaspora affairs ministry denied involvement in the campaign, which reportedly provided about $2m to an Israeli firm for the social media posts.) But that effort is only one of many such campaigns coordinated by the ministry, which has received limited news coverage. The ministry of diaspora affairs and its partners compile weekly reports based on tips from pro-Israel US student groups, some of which receive funding from Israeli government sources. For example, Hillel International, a co-founder of the Israel on Campus Coalition network and one of the largest Jewish campus groups in the world, has reported financial and strategic support from Mosaic United, a public benefit corporation backed by Chikli’s ministry. The longstanding partnership is now being utilized to shape the political debate over Israel’s war. In February, Hillel’s chief executive, Adam Lehman, appeared before the Knesset to discuss the strategic partnership with Mosaic and the ministry of diaspora affairs, which he said had already produced results. “We are changing administrations. Just last week, MIT, the same president who was lambasted in front of Congress, took the step of fully suspending her Students for Justice in Palestine chapter for crossing lines, and for creating an unwelcoming environment for Jewish students,” said Lehmann, referencing the president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sally Kornbluth. Hillel International, CyberWell, the NBEC, the Israeli ministry of diaspora affairs and Voices of Israel/Concert did not respond to a request for comment.

This investigative report reviewed recent government hearings, Israeli corporate filings, procurement documents and other public records. While private individuals and foundations primarily fund many of the organizations devoted to pro-Israel advocacy, most likely without foreign direction, the records point to substantial Israeli government involvement in American politics about the Gaza war, free speech on college campuses and Israel-Palestine policy.

The Guardian reports that Israel Apartheid State has documents detailing efforts to shape US opinion on the Gaza genocide in favor of the pro-Israel position.

Read the full story at The Guardian.

[nicklloydnow]

“The system of the motorway, the social relation of the motorway, is left untouched by any attack on its specifics - untouched or is it reinvigorated? Does it bloom like the desert in places where fire and rain have visited. Anarchism against circulation is an ethics; it doesn't hurt the motorway even though it wants to. It doesn't hurt the motorway because it is just one response among many to present conditions, and it takes its place alongside all other theories and actions as an ideology - it exists as one strand in the strand of strands of commodified consciousness.

On the motorway, everything that can happen will happen, including dissent against the motorway. But we see now that achieving the heightened condition of dissent does not bestow upon the rebel a capacity to change anything, or even to escape the conditioning of the possible exits open to her/him. Saying "no" does not transport us to a place where we might make decisions separately from the world in which we live. I have met anarchists who live like ironside puritans and others of a deliberately decadent inclination, but whether you forbid or celebrate you do not touch capitalism itself. At every point it holds you in its palm - sometimes allowing a little more movement, sometimes gripping harder. Capitalism has facilitated democracy, fascism, state socialism, theocracy, militarism, human rights, religious revivals; it processes and transforms all social organisation into its social organisation. Every political aspiration is compatible with its productive relation. You propose the counter culture? Capital will commodify it, instigate it, reproduce it, and sell it. There is no outside of the loop.

The motorway cannot be undone either by ideas or practice. It cannot be undone. You think a million people like you could do the business? Well, where are they? If you haven't got them after two hundred years of agitation what makes you think they will turn up now or at some time in the future? And do you really think it possible that a million people can believe the same thing at the same time? How would you check they were really thinking what you thought and not hoping to get something else out of it: a Phd thesis, a promotion, a ministerial promo-tion, a groovy party, radical credibility, a new girlfriend? And if they did truly believe as you believe, if they downloaded your consciousness - by what mechanism would that change the world? Proposed democratic change works like magic, it has a misdirected relation to the movement of capital: if we all think the same thing then everything will come good. In reality, we know that agreement is both false and also not decisive on the mechanisms of power, which act automatically, independently of decision-making.

Why should large numbers of people be convinced by what one person claims more than the promises of any other? The internet is full of get rich quick schemes, anarchism is just one of them.

The easy anarchist answer is that it is not thoughts that change the world but acts. The fundamental flaw in political action is this: the more militant (and therefore true) the action is, the fewer people want to participate in it. The more unreal and fluffy, the more inclined they will be to turn up. Anarchists, being mostly young men, still have not learnt that only young men like to fight back on the streets, everyone else will find excuses not to be there. In directing campaigns, the choice for activists is stark, it is between numbers or ideological purity.

But even to say that rubs some up the wrong way; all discussion subverts the glory of acts. Apparently talking and thinking gets you nowhere because "there is no point in theory without action", as if the likes of Class War or RTS have ever got anywhere. How could Monsieur Dupont demonstrate its activities on the streets? How is anarchism demonstrated on the streets? It seems after all, that all deliberate interventions made by the pro-revolutionary minority are acts but what is really important is whether the proposed interventions either achieve, or are capable of achieving, what is claimed for them.” (p. 160 - 162)

[pannaginip]

NUPL Cebu Chapter on Twitter @nupl_cebu:

Press Release

Feb 25, 2024

The NUPL Cebu Chapter expresses its strongest condemnation over the killings of Hannah Jay Cesista and four other individuals, namely Domingo Compoc, Perlito Historia, Marlon Omosura, and Alberto Sancho in Bilar, Bohol, collectively known as Bilar 5.

An Iskolar ng Bayan, Hannah earned her Political Science degree from the UP Cebu. As a college student, she joined various organizations aligned with her principles and beliefs - Youth For Christ UP Cebu Chapter, Cebu Students for Justice and Peace, & Kabataan Partylist UP Cebu.

She then enrolled in the University of San Carlos (USC) to pursue a law degree. During her law school days, Hannah volunteered at NUPL Cebu and was instrumental in forming the law students’ arm of the Cebu Chapter.

NUPL Cebu members can attest to Hannah’s unwavering dedication and active involvement in the chapter’s activities in providing legal services to marginalized communities.

She was always the first person to volunteer when lawyers needed assistance in the countless legal work of the organization. She joined community visits for paralegal trainings & discussions on human rights despite the demands of law school. Hannah also passed the 2022 Bar Exams.

Numerous reports have circulated concerning an alleged “encounter” between the New People’s Army (NPA) and Philippine National Police (PNP) at Sitio Matin-ao 2, Barangay Campagao, Bilar, Bohol last February 23, 2024, Friday.

Contrary to law enforcement’s claims, initial reports received by NUPL Cebu show significant discrepancies and expose their possible commission of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) violations.

Several accounts support that no encounter has transpired. Instead, the five individuals were ordered to vacate the house where they were staying. The four men were forced to strip off their shirts. Along with Cesista, they were forced to roll in the mud.

The witnesses narrated that they were pleading with state forces to stop their inhumane acts but to no avail.

Killing Hannah and her companions is one of the many state-sanctioned efforts to harm activists, human rights workers, and dissenters- as part of their futile attempt to conceal the harsh realities of poverty and inequality in this country.

NUPL Cebu expresses its deepest condolences to the family and friends of Hannah. We call on the Philippine government to conduct a prompt and impartial investigation and to hold accountable the perpetrators responsible for the deaths of Bilar 5. Hustisya alang sa Bilar 5!

Long live Hannah Cesista! Long live Domingo Compoc! Long live Parlito Historia! Long live Marlon Omosura! Long live Alberto Sancho! Resume Peace Talks!

2024 Feb. 25

[critical-skeptic]

WHAT NOW?

TEMU Gilead is Coming: An Unvarnished Reckoning with Our Own Failures

This isn’t just a loss; it’s a colossal, existential crisis that everyone on the anti-QMAGA side, from Democrats to so-called progressives, needs to confront with brutal honesty. Trump has clawed his way back into power, buoyed by young male voters, sweeping the electoral college and taking both chambers of Congress. The dystopian blueprint outlined by Project 2025 is now within arm’s reach of becoming reality, and while there’s plenty of blame to go around, this moment demands an unsparing self-critique of our own faction’s spectacular failures.

Over the past two decades, a toxic combination of identity politics, performative activism, and hollow gestures of moral superiority has undermined what should have been a broad, powerful coalition against fascism. Instead of building alliances, we drew lines in the sand. Instead of engaging and educating, we alienated and dismissed. The pendulum swing between left and right has only accelerated, each side stoking the other’s flames in a downward spiral. And here we are, watching the collapse of democracy with smugness and overconfidence as fuel for our own undoing.

Identity Politics and Performative Activism: The Double-Edged Sword

Identity politics has been weaponized against us as effectively as we’ve used it to rally support. What began as a call for recognition, equality, and justice has been twisted into a purity spiral, where every misstep is grounds for cancellation and every dissenting voice—even within our ranks—is branded a heretic. We’ve reduced complex human issues to hashtags and purity tests, alienating potential allies with a sanctimonious fervor that rivals our enemies’. What’s worse, we’ve become oblivious to the backlash this has created among younger men—particularly white men—who feel vilified and abandoned, driving them straight into the arms of the right.

Want proof of this? Look no further than any outrage towards this very critique of ourselves or that very sensation you're feeling right now to dismiss my points, or to accuse me of being QMAGA, a misogynist, or some other convenient label. That is precisely the problem.

It’s no accident that Trump has seen a surge of support among Gen Z males. We’ve handed them over with our relentless portrayal of masculinity as toxic, our demonization of entire demographics, and our refusal to engage in meaningful dialogue. Every performative gesture, every viral Twitter clapback, every “woke” marketing campaign that reduces people’s lived experiences to commodified slogans—this is the oxygen that has fueled their resentment. And they’ve responded by voting in droves for the man they see as the ultimate middle finger to the establishment we represent.

Overconfidence and Smugness: The Seeds of Our Undoing

Our political campaigns have been plagued by a smug, overconfident belief that moral superiority alone would carry us to victory. Kamala Harris, to her credit, didn’t lean heavily into the “first woman” narrative during her campaign. But the broader messaging from her camp, the overreliance on pop culture endorsements, and the naive assumption that “Swifties” and Hollywood elites would deliver an unshakable base reveal how little we understood the electorate. We banked on identity and celebrity while underestimating the deeply ingrained conservatism within key demographics, including Latino voters, who remain far more complex and varied than we cared to acknowledge.

This overconfidence blinded us to the reality that smugness and moral posturing are not substitutes for coalition-building. The Latino community, for example, has shown time and again that their votes cannot be taken for granted. Yet we assumed that platitudes and virtue signals were enough, while the right steadily worked to win them over with culturally resonant messages and appeals to tradition. We’ve seen this before, but refused to learn the lesson: alienating allies, relying on performative gestures, and dismissing uncomfortable truths only strengthens the opposition.

Where Do We Go From Here?

The loss of this election isn’t just a temporary setback—it’s a harbinger of a dark future. A future where Project 2025’s corpochristofascist agenda is enacted, draining what little remains of our democracy, stripping away rights, and leaving us to fend off an authoritarian regime with dwindling resources and even fewer allies. We have already seen what happens when we rely on fantasies of “resistance” without the hardened resolve, the coalitions, and the practical strategies to back it up. The younger men on our side, while passionate, are often ill-prepared for the ugly reality of what resistance will truly require.

So what now? Are women and other marginalized groups prepared to rise above the petty infighting and bring the fight where it truly needs to be? Are we ready to abandon the performative acts and embrace true, coalition-based action that goes beyond virtue signaling and social media outrage? Or will we keep doubling down on what hasn’t worked, content to watch democracy crumble from the sidelines while we trade moral victories for actual losses?

TEMU Gilead is coming. The question is whether you will play the role of TEMU Offred—engaged in empty gestures and divisive rhetoric—or if you will wake up, before the last of us who have fought, and bled, and sacrificed are too exhausted, too old, or too dead to be of any fucking use. The time for games is over. Wake up before it’s too late. I hope I'm wrong, I hope I'm being an alarmist and that I am utterly wrong, but if I'm not, please stay safe.

[beardedmrbean]

Is it worth crippling freedom of the press, from conservative stings and factory-farming exposes to citizen journalism and local watchdogs, to hide the public conversations of politicians?

That's one framing of the issue confronting the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as the 29-member court, minus two unexplained recusals, reviews the constitutionality of an Oregon law that prohibits "unannounced audiovisual recording" in public – unless the speaker being recorded is an on-duty cop, or a "felony that endangers human life" is taking place.

A majority of non-recused judges voted in March to overturn a divided three-judge panel that knocked down the statute last year as a content-based restriction that is "not narrowly tailored to achieving a compelling governmental interest," failing the high judicial bar of "strict scrutiny."

The panel majority specifically faulted the law for privileging "a state executive officer’s official activities" over "a police officer’s official activities," while the dissent argued the law would be content-neutral if the panel let the Beaver State sever the exceptions. The state didn't seek that, and the majority said a general ban would create "significant constitutional issues."

Short supplemental briefs are due Tuesday to address two specific questions as well as "any other properly raised issue concerning the merits," the full court said May 13.

The first is whether the section of the law that prohibits obtaining or trying to obtain "any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus," unless "all participants are specifically informed" what's happening, "triggers First Amendment scrutiny" – in other words, any First Amendment relevance to a ban on audio recording.

The second is whether the law's exceptions constitute content-based speech regulations, which would trigger strict scrutiny. 

That would likely doom the statute unless Oregon can show it has a compelling interest in the privacy of public conversations and the law is the least restrictive way to protect that privacy, attorney Gabe Walters of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which filed a joint friend-of-the-court brief last month, wrote in an email.

"The government will be unlikely to carry that burden because, for example, a party to a conversation could roughly transcribe it from memory immediately afterward without the consent of the other parties to the conversation," Walters said.

The case has drawn surprisingly little interest beyond plaintiff Project Veritas, whose bread-and-butter is unannounced audiovisual recording, and defendant Oregon. (Project Veritas parted ways with its founder James O'Keefe two months after oral argument.)

Not one mainstream media organization or press freedom group filed friend-of-the-court briefs, nor the ACLU, according to the docket going back to the 9th Circuit's original agreement to review U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman's 2021 ruling upholding Oregon's law.

The ACLU did express concerns about the FBI raiding O'Keefe's home in 2021 in connection with the diary of President Biden's daughter Ashley, which Project Veritas said it obtained legally during the 2020 campaign but tried to return to law enforcement.

The only outside brief submitted before the panel ruled came from Portland lawyer Bert Krages, whose legal handbook for photographers came out shortly before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. He became a louder activist for photographers' rights in public amid post-attack crackdowns by "overzealous law enforcement officers, security guards" and others.

Krages filed again in April, saying the law personally restricts his ability to advocate for environmental restrictions on "wakesurfing" because he makes videos in public that unavoidably contain "conversations that are extraneous to the subject matter I am trying to record."

For example, he was once recording on the Willamette River "when an unseen person on the other side began using a bullhorn to communicate to unseen listeners." The law functionally shuts down recording wherever "a multitude of conversations are taking place."

The law isn't even limited to "face-to-face conversations," Krages told the full court, requiring that "the person making the recording must inform any silent listeners to a conversation as well as those who speak." 

He said it was "often impossible and sometimes ill-advised" to announce when recording "hate speech, criminal activity, [or] child abuse," and the full court can't save the overbroad law simply by assuming "prosecutorial discretion will be exercised."

The conservative Liberty Justice Center urged the full court to takes its cues from Supreme Court decisions on sign codes in 2015 and 2022, striking down one that "treated ideological signs more favorably than political signs" and upholding the other while clarifying that "swapping an obvious subject-matter distinction for a 'function or purpose' proxy" has the same problem.

The public interest law firm rattled off a long list of specific situations in which the law doesn't apply to illustrate how thoroughly content-based it is, showing the law is not a permissible "time, place, or manner restriction." ____________________________

Submitted by @brosef

This just feels like all kinds of fascist nonsense to me

FIRE's joint brief is signed by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which has a "long history of conducting undercover investigations to expose cruelty to animals," and Animal Outlook, which shares undercover agribusiness recordings with "law enforcement officials so they have proof of crimes against animals."

University of Denver law professors Alan Chen and Justin Marceau, who wrote a "monograph studying the historical role of undercover investigations in promoting democracy," also signed. They received PETA "Justice for Animal" awards for assisting a legal challenge to Idaho's so-called ag-gag law in 2018.

"The gathering and dissemination of information about matters of public concern is no longer exclusively or even primarily the province of a small number of newspapers, journalists, or authors," they wrote. 

What's at stake is nothing less than the continued viability of the "citizen-journalist," whose interest is at the heart of the founders' conception of freedom of the press and whose work has never been less expensive to produce and find an audience, their brief says. 

The Supreme Court ruled conclusively that "audiovisual recording is speech," according to the groups, when in 2011 it struck down a Vermont law that prohibited pharmacies from disclosing and pharmaceutical companies from using "prescriber-identifying information for marketing purposes without a doctor’s consent." 

The state allowed use of the information for medical research and its own "prescription drug education program," however.

The 6-3 ruling confirmed that governments cannot regulate speech based on its content "even if the speech is commercial in nature," as then-Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. 

He quoted from its 1996 ruling that prohibits states from enacting "total bans on truthful commercial advertisements," which said the First Amendment "directs us to be especially skeptical of regulations that seek to keep people in the dark for what the government perceives to be their own good."

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press backed the healthcare services provider challenging the law in a friend-of-the-court brief, citing the law's negative implications for "data gathering, analysis and publication … in journalism today."

The new instructions from the full court May 13 suggest it may revise a divided panel's precedent from the 2018 ruling against portions of Idaho's ag-gag law, which the Animal Legal Defense Fund challenged.

The Legislature passed the law following outrage about a "secretly-filmed exposé of the operation of an Idaho dairy farm" that went viral for its "disturbing" depiction of how cows were treated, but it impermissibly criminalized "misrepresentations to enter a production facility" and prohibited "audio and video recordings of a production facility’s operations," the court found.

The panel determined, however, that it permissibly criminalized "obtaining records … by misrepresentation" and "employment by misrepresentation with the intent to cause economic or other injury."

RCFP, American Society of News Editors, Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones, broadcasting giant E.W. Scripps, Society of Professional Journalists and many other media organizations and associations backed ALDF in a joint brief at the time.

[mariacallous]

Despite Bosnia and Herzegovina’s progress towards European Union accession, Bosnian Serb authorities continue to “actively subvert” the state, peace overseer Christian Schmidt said in his latest update to the UN secretary general, citing in particular “unprecedented pressure” on the judiciary.

The leaked 40-page report is the sixth submitted by Schmidt, a German politician, since his appointment in August 2021 to oversee the country’s adherence to the peace deal that ended its 1992-95 war. The five others made similar complaints about authorities under Bosnian Serb strongman Milorad Dodik in the predominantly Serb-populated Republika Srpska entity.

Their threat to “paralyse” state authorities, he wrote, “is a threat to the functionality of the State and its ability to carry out its responsibilities”.

Dodik repeated the threat most recently last month in response to a German and Rwandan draft United Nations resolution that would declare July 11 an international day of remembrance for the 1995 Srebrenica genocide, a characterisation the Republika Srpska disputes.  

In March, the European Union gave the green light to the start of accession negotiations with Bosnia, a major milestone in the country’s recovery from war and integration with the bloc. But even against such a backdrop, the pressure on the state from the Republika Srpska continued.

“Besides promoting the abolishment of the BiH Court and the BiH Prosecutor’s Office, the RS ruling coalition undermines the BiH Constitutional Court as the guardian of the constitutional and legal order of BiH,” wrote Schmidt, whose official title is High Representative.

“If pursued, these actions could lead to a de facto if not a de jure dissolution of the State of BiH, which is what RS President Milorad Dodik continuously advocates. This would be a scenario with grave consequences.”

Historical revisionism

Schmidt noted that, during the reporting period from mid-October 2023 to mid-April 2024,  the ruling coalition in the Republika Srpska continued to organise rallies on the administrative line between Republika Srpska and the mainly Bosniak and Croat Federation entity under the banner, ‘The Border Exists’. 

“Besides promoting the idea of secession, these rallies create a divisive environment prone to security incidents,” Schmidt wrote in the report, which BIRN has seen. 

He also warned of efforts by Republika Srpska authorities to limit civic action and suppress political dissent via intimidation and punishment.

Dodik and the Republika Srpska government do not recognise Schmidt as High Representative, citing the abstention of Russia and China when his appointment was voted on in the UN Security Council; the report noted their continued “inflammatory rhetoric and actions” aimed at undermining his office.

The report also cited further regression in how the past is addressed as well as a rise in ethno-nationalistic historical revisionism, denial of genocide and war crimes and the glorification of war criminals. 

Such trends go hand in hand with broader declines in “democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, leading to increased mistrust and polarisation within society”, Schmidt wrote.

He cited deteriorating inter-community relations in Srebrenica over the previous two years, as well as incidents targeting returnees. 

The report should come before the UN Security Council on May 15. 

[oldguardleatherdog]

Today's Wall O' Text: Our lives are at stake. Fat-shaming Trump is more than OK - it's necessary.

I've been taking hits for my blog entry in response to a Facebook post by a cyber friend taking the LGBTQ+ community to task for making fun of Trump's weight after he lied during his arrest in Atlanta yesterday that he weighed 215 pounds. I posted a blistering screed here earlier today as a reaction to seeing some Facebook friends make a post shaming the community for calling Trump out on yet another lie that his credulous followers will gladly swallow whole and think it tastes like chicken.

It boggles my mind that we're indulging in self-loathing admonitions to play nice and treat Trump with human kindness while he and his tens of millions of proxies are carrying out genocide against transgender Americans and passing legislation openly designed to remove LGBTQ+ people from civil society.

I've deleted my original post and follow-up and am restating it here with settings that limit the replies and reblogs, all of which were filled with vile personal insults and invective aimed at me for committing the SJW's canon unforgivable sin of making fun of someone's appearance - even though that "someone" is directing a campaign of forced detransitioning, enforced separation, erasure of us from history and culture, and is directing efforts that have the stated intent to immiserate and end our lives.

I've been a gay activist fighting for our right to exist for nearly four decades, and I don't care if I lose goodwill or karma points or cyberfriends over this stance. That stuff is wonderful and means a great deal, I don't take it lightly, and I know this might mean thee end of the goodwill coming my way and could mess up my ability to be here and help in other ways...

but the danger we're in is greater than my concern for my gig, ego, or status, and I'll give it all up in order to give this battle everything I've got. This is my last stand after nearly 40 years of activism, marching with ACT/UP and Queer Nation in the 90s fighting against the same forces, when I'd just gone HIV positive, when my friends and loved ones were dying of cat and bird diseases, down to 80 pounds in an oxygen tent, covered with lesions, tongues eaten away by candida...

They never got the chance to marry, to see 40, to find real love, to finish their art - and some made me promise that I would go on in their name and with their spirit, to finish the art and the work and the life they weren't going to get the chance to finish (I know the trolls will say I'm lying and they can F off all the way to Hell and stay there, the nerve of them to shit on their souls and our memories of them).

I may lose a lot of cyber friends, and that's unfortunate, but I have to sleep at night.

Here's what I wrote:

To those who are telling me we shouldn't make fun of Trump's weight:

I wholeheartedly dissent.

Trump, like Reagan, is our murderer.

The current and ongoing trans genocide is his fault.

Drag bans, the continuing LGBTQ+ rights rollback, the systematic erasure of us from libraries and history and culture, the "groomerpedo" slur bombardment, pushing us into exile from our home states, legislation pending that will prohibit us from public spaces, the explicit goal of removing us from public view and civil society, Florida doctors who can refuse to treat us, forced detransition of all trans people in Florida and soon elsewhere, armed Proud Boys at drag shows, the Colorado Springs slaughter, and worse: all of this is directly Trump's doing.

And still, we're deluded enough to go high when they go low!

Attempts from within the community to muzzle ourselves in the name of some ridiculous woo-woo SJW directive, this insidious assimilationist garbage, plays right into their hands and renders us weak and impotent.

No one is going to rescue us. If you're not involved in hardcore activism RIGHT NOW, you are complicit in their efforts to kill us.

I dare you to challenge me. Make fun of the fatass bastard with gleeful abandon.

Get with the Goddamn program before it's too late.

***

I've restricted replies and additions to the main post. Feel free to sound off in the notes and reblogs, but this is where I stand on the most important issue we're contending with as a community, and I won't allow my words to be conditioned or their impact diluted.

I know my beloved mutuals will be dismayed, and I'm truly sorry because I do value you and your own well-reasoned and strong opinions and this could reasonably be regarded as an attempt to diminish or trivialize you politically, philosophically, and personally; please know that's not my intent.

As an LGBTQ+ activist for more than 37 years, who marched with ACT/UP and Queer Nation during a time that was in many ways worse than the climate of today, I have a duty and an obligation to say things clearly, bluntly, fully, with unambiguous conviction:

OUR LIVES ARE AT STAKE. PEOPLE ARE SUFFERING. WE'RE BEING DRIVEN OUT OF OUR HOMES.

THEY ARE FORCING TRANS PEOPLE TO REVERT TO THEIR ASSIGNED GENDER AT BIRTH SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY WITH BRUTAL SADISTIC GLEE, MAKING THEM WATCH THEIR BODIES DYSMORPH AND REGRESS HOUR BY HOUR.

THEY HAVE CLEARLY, PUBLICLY, AND REPEATEDLY STATED THEIR INTENT TO REMOVE US FROM SIGHT AND CIVIL SOCIETY AND THEY ARE DOING IT TO US RIGHT NOW, TODAY, AS YOU READ THIS -

- and you have the sheer unmitigated temerity, the nerve, the gall to tell me I'm wrong to encourage fat-shaming of that man, that loathsome pustulent festering open wound on our nation and our world, whose God is his belly, whose proxies and minions and TENS OF MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS AND WORSHIPPERS IN THIS COUNTRY are in lockstep with his intent -

- you tell me I'm wrong, shamelessly and mindlessly and in open denial of what you see in front of your naive and deluded eyes, and when you do this YOU ARE TELLING ME YOU DON'T CARE, YOU THINK I'M LYING TO YOU, YOU WON'T HELP SAVE US, YOU ARE UNWILLING TO SAVE YOURSELF, and YOU ARE MAKING THE CHOICE TO JOIN HIM AND AID HIS EFFORTS TO WIPE US OUT.

Join me, or get the hell out of my sight, my life, and my community. We need you like we need AIDS - and I've had AIDS for 33 years and I tell you: you are worse than AIDS, because AIDS is a mindless and brainless and soulless and consciousless killer, a virus, but you are killing us knowing full well what you are doing.

That is all that I am going to say to you.

[readingsquotes]

"JEWISH STUDENTS on our university campuses are in danger.

They are facing the threat of assault and arrest by overzealous riot police, suspension by universities such as Columbia, Princeton, and UCLA, character assassination and doxing by well-funded lobbying organizations and individuals, and blacklisting on murky websites connected to a manipulative foreign power.

They are not alone, however: these Jewish students are working together with countless others—Asian, Black, Latinx, Indigenous, white, and Arab—to protest the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza. Every chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) that I know of has vocal and active Jewish members, and there are many overlaps between SJP and campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP).

Yet this is not how recent events on campuses across the country are being depicted in mainstream media and political representations. Both the ongoing campus protests and the broader discussion of Israel’s genocide in Gaza have persistently been framed by a disingenuous political narrative—picked up and thoughtlessly recycled in far too many mainstream media reports—as a crisis of “antisemitism on campus.” 

....That’s because the intent of the ADL and similar outfits (as well as the politicians with whom they are coordinating) is to misrepresent the enormous tide of student protest against Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza not merely in order to discredit it but to banish it altogether. Their aim, in fact—and this is no longer mere speculation but already taking form in pending legislation—is to render criticism of Israel not simply “immoral” but all but illegal. In the meantime, they seek to suppress protest against a genocide enabled and financed by every taxpayer in the United States—and to displace concern about the genocide itself with a manufactured crisis designed to draw attention away from Gaza, allowing the Israeli government to grind away at Palestinian lives. Little wonder, then, that the ADL has been warning of a spike in what it calls “antisemitism” since October. Little wonder, too, that the editors of Wikipedia recently concluded that the ADL is an “unreliable source” for discussions of antisemitism that overlap in any way with the question of Palestine, as the current “crisis of antisemitism” certainly does.

...As James Bamford recently pointed out, Israel is in effect operating a secret spying network on US campuses, sharing information gathered on American student protesters with Israeli state intelligence in order to “crush them.” And another recent report, in The Guardian, reveals the extent to which Zionist lobbying organizations in the US are coordinating closely with the Israeli state in order “to strike back at student protests, human rights organizations and other voices of dissent” in the United States.