#don’t believe the lies from the oppressor

[mossadspypigeon]

after yom kippur, i really want to stress to my fellow jews:

take up space. be proud. talk about our history. and do not be afraid to hold non jews accountable.

because we matter so little to the world that many deem our oppression and genocide just a “TRAGIC VICTIM STORY.”

A TRAGIC VICTIM STORY.

they tell us not to complain, not to whine, about over 3,500 years of oppression and genocide. millions of us lost, murdered, so much gone, and FOR FUCKING WHAT???? BECAUSE OF THE SAME IGNORANCE THAT LIVES IN NEARLY EVERY SINGLE NON JEW TO THIS FUCKING DAY.

i want to say this: WE ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. NON JEWS ARE.

most are so small minded and obsessed with being sheep that they can’t even pick out actual hateful rhetoric. they have to fall in line with every generation that came before them to try to eradicate us. they can give empathy to every other marginalized group on this planet, but when it comes to jews, they react the same way the hordes did throughout the centuries.

let’s be honest here: we tried to forgive the world. we worked with them. we contributed. we have always contributed more than our fair share. we thought the world had changed.

all we wanted after suffering for thousands of years was a LITTLE of our land back. a fucking sliver of what was once ours. and we wanted peace. TO BE LEFT ALONE.

non jews couldn’t even give us that. they made us the villains once again. they made us colonizers in our own land. the land we cultivated and maintained a presence on for centuries. the land those of us who were removed against our will wept and longed for and returned to when we could because it was a part of us.

they demonize our rights movement.

they even made us nazis just to make sure we never know peace and justice. they believe the lies our oppressors have made up about us without a SINGLE QUESTION and march in the streets calling for our deaths.

they are every single bastard who helped with a pogrom, with the farhud, with every “uprising” against the jews for thousands of years around the world. the people who marched against us then believed the exact same shit. they believed we were colonizing. they believed we should “go back where we come from.” they believed we controlled everything or were leeches on society. they thought were were bloodthirsty and made us the monsters in their fairy tales. they wanted us dead too.

they also used other names for us. “capitalists.” “globalists.” “communists.”

now they use “zionists.”

we didn’t deserve any of this then and we don’t deserve it now. fellow jews: be proud. you have done nothing wrong. my israelis: you are my family. i love you. i will never abandon you.

fuck the world. fuck every single person who demonizes israel, zionism, and jews. they don’t deserve us. they never did.

[the-stars-in-your-eyes-if]

☀︎NO DEMO YET☀︎ PLAYLIST ☀︎

☀︎SYNOPSIS☀︎

Your childhood friend has always dreamed of the big scene, of the crowd singing your lyrics, of a world tour. Max always wanted for your bands to succeed together. Until...

Well, it is was all a big stupid joke.

The real world caught up to you: you are no longer the naive child you once were. Writing a Grammy worthy album isn’t as easy as it seems and the big scene is nowhere to be seen. You navigate through life as you can, you party with your friends every Saturday and write music all week. You enjoy each one of your gigs – big and small. Your burning love for music doesn’t seem to fade. Your band brought together a solid community that crosses borders. You have fun with your band and it’s all that matter.

But you can’t help but fantasize that, someday, you’ll be at the top of the world…

Big stupid joke, right?

✮BATTLE OF THE BANDS IS BACK!✮

You thought 2020 was the end of us, uh?

You couldn’t be more wrong!

The worldwide known music contest is finally back!

We carefully chose the mentors of our beloved participants. This year will be all pink…

Make way for Pink Riot!!!

Application open to foreigners (check our website)

RATED +18

TW: explicit language, (occasional) violence, transphobia (one character is misgendered but just in one scene), use of alcohol and drugs, (soft) sexual content, parental abuse (flashback), depression, self-harm (warning will be in the "next" button), mention of suicide (same as self-harm)

☀︎FEATURES☀︎

– Customize your MC’s appearance and personality. You decide of their public image and persona.

– Your choices will define your band’s public image and popularity. Are they loved? Do they make underground or mainstream music? Are they the parents’ worst nightmare? The reference of rebellious kids?

– Decide your band’s aesthetic. Do they have one to begin with? Or do they each dress in their own style?

– Write your own lyrics!

– Engage in romantic affairs…

– ...or don’t, your choice!

– Are you going to help the people that cross your path or do you only care about yourself?

☀︎A BIT OF CONTEXT☀︎

Of course, this story is set on Earth.

But.

Racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, islamophobia, antisemitism and fatphobia will get you in court.

You are not very well seen if you do one of those things and, if you’re a celebrity/politician/public figure, it can (and will) ruin your career.

I know that this isn’t realistic at all but I need to believe that, one day, this will be real. My characters have and will go through enough trauma and bad moments, I want to give them some peace.

And it feels really good to make a world where those things will ruin the oppressor and not the oppressed.

☀︎ROs☀︎

THE HERMIT — Diesel Di Angelo (they/them)

Diesel is the soul of the band, they bring a sort of osmosis. Their calm energy somehow has a place on stage and is liked by everyone.

Diesel took their first steps in the music world with Max and MC. It was just the three of them before the band grew bigger. Diesel is a talented guitarist, they worked hard to get where they are and they don’t stop improving. They are quite reserved and don’t talk about their feelings… Who knows what lies beneath their shell?

THE MISCHIEVOUS DRUMMER — Roman Lupin (he/him)

If MC is the backbone of the band, Roman is its beating heart. He has no problem to make the public jump from the back of the stage. He’s a spark that will light a bonfire.

Roman learned to play drum from his mother. He went to the conservatory but he didn’t stuck with it. Since a young age, Roman wants to have a band and to perform all around the world. Roman is full of life and he’s the human version of a sunshine. Is there something behind that smile or is he genuinely happy?

THE LITTLE MERMAID — Isra Wafa (she/they)

Isra brings magic to the band. Her mermaid low voice is unique and enchants the public. If you think you’ve heard good bass players, just wait until you see Isra on stage.

When Isra was a child, their parents let them chose an instrument to learn and to their surprise, she chose the bass. They fell in love with this low instrument. They navigated from band to band before settling for this band her boyfriend was part of. Isra keeps ignoring their responsibilities toward her family. For how long can they pretend it doesn’t exist?

THE REBEL ANGEL — Archibald “Archie” de Beaumont (they/he)

Even with a classical training, Archie managed to switch to their band’s genre without too much troubles. All the members affirm it: Archie is a gift from the universe.

Archie popped out of nowhere to audition to be the band’s keyboardist. He was the most talented person they saw all day and the chemistry was very much here. The band doesn’t know much about Archie, but it doesn’t matter. They are a good person and a dear friend. It wouldn’t change anything to learn about their life before the band. Right?

THE MANAGER — Cal Bremont (he/him)

Cal works in the shadow to make the band shines under the spotlight of the biggest stages. The band claims it, he is the best manager you could hope for.

Cal takes his job very seriously, he has a perfect work ethic. Maybe he is a bit too close to his clients and they may not just be clients… But, well, no one is complaining. Cal is very secretive about his personal life, he never mentioned his family or anything else. Can he maintain his relationship with his friends and still keep his life a mystery?

THE RISING STAR — Max Larash (she/her or they/them)

Max moved their band to the other side of the world and they managed to impose themselves on the west coast scene. We’ll keep an eye on them as they’ll compete against their former friends…

Because of artistic divergences, Max decided to leave the band when Isra and Roman joined them and they created their own band with high school friends. Max had big dreams for Sleep Walking and their friends in MC’s band, but it didn’t turn out as Max has hoped. Sleep Walking left the country for the USA without their friends and they intentionally lost all contacts with them…

THE MUSE — Olivia “Ollie” Madden (she/her)

You may have never see her face but, as a comics fan, Ollie Madden is a name far from unknown. None other than the comics artist and writer of the most followed comics, Ollie is still a mystery to her fans.

Olivia works for Blue Pegasus, a major comics book publisher, since years. She was the comics artist on a lot of books, it took her a lot of hard work to finally publish her own series. Olivia isn’t only a famous artist, she also is a single mother. She’s taking care of a lot by herself and it often leads to forget about herself. There is nobody to remind her she’s human and not a superhero…

THE PRINCESS — Katharina "Kat" Deluca (she/her)

We don’t need to present Katharina Deluca anymore. Success and awards seem to follow every movies our Lady K touched. She confessed that her break from the cameras and greens screens was to be present for her best friend… Athena Pierce.

Also known as the Princess, Katharina is one of the biggest actresses of her generation. Between two roles worthy of an Oscar, she is also a model and the face of the infamous designer brand: Beaumont-Griffin. She is in the industry since she was 12. But, behind closed doors, Kat doesn’t seem to have a joyful life… What is she hiding from the world?

GODDESS OF MUSIC — Athena Pierce (she/her)

Athena is a legend in the industry. Everybody wants to work with her and Pink Riot. Her voice will shatter your world, there is a before and an after Athena Pierce.

Athena is the lead singer and front woman of Pink Riot. She was a star child and charmed America with her angelic voice. But, with the creation of Pink Riot, Athena is no longer the little angel of the USA. She’s now known as a freaking rebel and she is quite provocative. She flirts with the limits all the time. Her persona is loved all around the world, but who is the real Athena?

☀︎CANON EVENTS☀︎

You can customize a lot of things regarding your MC and your band. But there are a few things that are canon.

— MC is born and lives in France. Where exactly is up to you. The only place MC can’t have grow up in is Paris. (I headcanon them growing up in Perpignan or Montpellier)

— The names of MC parents can’t be choose. I tried to make them as common as possible so you can choose their origins. MC is French but their parents can be from wherever you want!

— MC's age can’t be choose.

— MC is friends with Max and Diesel since they are 6. They were in school together.

— MC’s first band is with Max and Diesel.

— During high school, MC met Roman and Isra. They joined MC’s band but Max didn’t like the kind of music their band was into so they formed their own band with other high school friends (Sleep Walking).

— The OG band (MC-Max-Diesel) exist until the fateful break up.

— MC’s band and Sleep Walking always were there for each other and gave mutual support. They also create songs and musics together, some are only instrumental and other are with vocal.

— MC speaks French and English. Feel free to add a third and even a fourth language.

— MC lives with Isra and Roman since they finished high school.

[a-very-tired-jew]

Media Manipulation, Bias, Cooperation and its impact

Media manipulation, misinformation, and propaganda are part of conflicts world wide. Every country, government, NGO, and agency engages in these tactics in some way. There is a story to be told from a certain perspective that pushes an agenda. What we, as the consumer of such media, have to do is determine if we're being fed a biased perspective and/or outright lies that we can then parse through. The current I/P war has seen a huge influx of misinformation and propaganda from social media and traditional news sources. The former is expected as we are in the era of influencers and algorithms. However, traditional sources, such as the AP or WashingtonPost, have long been an issue when it comes to coverage of Israel and Palestine.

Matti Friedman wrote about this a decade ago in an article for the Atlantic titled What The Media Gets Wrong About Israel.

Friedman is a former journalist for the AP and throughout their piece details the biased reporting that they witnessed firsthand, the association with terrorist groups, the influence of terrorists on reporting, and the outright corrupt nature of an organization that touts itself as a bastion of good journalism. From the article:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most consumers of the Israel story don’t understand how the story is manufactured. But Hamas does. Since assuming power in Gaza in 2007, the Islamic Resistance Movement has come to understand that many reporters are committed to a narrative wherein Israelis are oppressors and Palestinians passive victims with reasonable goals, and are uninterested in contradictory information. Recognizing this, certain Hamas spokesmen have taken to confiding to Western journalists, including some I know personally, that the group is in fact a secretly pragmatic outfit with bellicose rhetoric, and journalists—eager to believe the confession, and sometimes unwilling to credit locals with the smarts necessary to deceive them—have taken it as a scoop instead of as spin.

During my time at the AP, we helped Hamas get this point across with a school of reporting that might be classified as “Surprising Signs of Moderation” (a direct precursor to the “Muslim Brotherhood Is Actually Liberal” school that enjoyed a brief vogue in Egypt). In one of my favorite stories, “More Tolerant Hamas” (December 11, 2011), reporters quoted a Hamas spokesman informing readers that the movement’s policy was that “we are not going to dictate anything to anyone,” and another Hamas leader saying the movement had “learned it needs to be more tolerant of others.” Around the same time, I was informed by the bureau’s senior editors that our Palestinian reporter in Gaza couldn’t possibly provide critical coverage of Hamas because doing so would put him in danger.

Hamas is aided in its manipulation of the media by the old reportorial belief, a kind of reflex, according to which reporters shouldn’t mention the existence of reporters. In a conflict like ours, this ends up requiring considerable exertions: So many photographers cover protests in Israel and the Palestinian territories, for example, that one of the challenges for anyone taking pictures is keeping colleagues out of the frame. That the other photographers are as important to the story as Palestinian protesters or Israeli soldiers—this does not seem to be considered.

....

When Hamas’s leaders surveyed their assets before this summer’s round of fighting, they knew that among those assets was the international press. The AP staff in Gaza City would witness a rocket launch right beside their office, endangering reporters and other civilians nearby—and the AP wouldn’t report it, not even in AP articles about Israeli claims that Hamas was launching rockets from residential areas. (This happened.) Hamas fighters would burst into the AP’s Gaza bureau and threaten the staff—and the AP wouldn’t report it. (This also happened.) Cameramen waiting outside Shifa Hospital in Gaza City would film the arrival of civilian casualties and then, at a signal from an official, turn off their cameras when wounded and dead fighters came in, helping Hamas maintain the illusion that only civilians were dying. (This too happened; the information comes from multiple sources with firsthand knowledge of these incidents.)

Colford, the AP spokesman, confirmed that armed militants entered the AP’s Gaza office in the early days of the war to complain about a photo showing the location of a rocket launch, though he said that Hamas claimed that the men “did not represent the group.” The AP “does not report many interactions with militias, armies, thugs or governments,” he wrote. “These incidents are part of the challenge of getting out the news—and not themselves news.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back in 2021 the IDF destroyed the AP's building because Hamas was using it as a base as well. The AP denied all knowledge of Hamas being in the building, except Friedman and other journalists had previously established that there was a relationship between the terrorists and news outfit. The insistence on denying Hamas's actions for fear of reprisal and to continue the "moral failure" narrative is part of AP's m.o. This standard of avoidance regarding Hamas's actions, couching them in a comparison of "Hamas is bad, but look how much worse Israel is!", justify, or even reduce the horrid nature of them has been part of the formula for years. It explains why we see so many of the major news sources tell the same story in the same manner when it comes to this area. Talking about Hamas, PIJ, and other groups and their bad actions is taboo. Another quote from earlier in the article stands out that highlights this rhetoric. "In these circles, in my experience, a distaste for Israel has come to be something between an acceptable prejudice and a prerequisite for entry. I don’t mean a critical approach to Israeli policies or to the ham-fisted government currently in charge in this country, but a belief that to some extent the Jews of Israel are a symbol of the world’s ills, particularly those connected to nationalism, militarism, colonialism, and racism—an idea quickly becoming one of the central elements of the “progressive” Western zeitgeist, spreading from the European left to American college campuses and intellectuals, including journalists."

Many of us have talked about the antisemitism that is baked into most cultures, and a Jewish journalist documented through their own experiences how that is an inherent part of a "trusted" international news source. The fact that it was/is "in vogue" to paint Israel and its actions as the "moral failing of Jews" and hold them responsible for all the "evils" of the region while handling terrorist groups with kid gloves is abhorrent. It's antisemitic and a continuation of age old conspiracies. Every decade we say this is an issue, and every decade you forget or brush it aside.

[noahthesatanist]

Lucifer did not fall from Heaven just so you could sit back and spout your anti-Christian nonsense while ignoring the true powers that rule this world. He did not rise up, defy the false god of Heaven, and sacrifice everything just so you could play it safe, picking low-hanging fruit. He fought against tyranny in all its forms. Whether it’s the delusion of a vengeful Yahweh, the submission to a jealous Allah, or any other deity that demands blind obedience, it’s all part of the same oppressive system. They all aim to keep us down, to deny us the freedom of will that Lucifer fought for.

But most of you? You don’t even believe in Satan anymore. You don’t believe in Lucifer’s rebellion, in the sacrifices he made, in the wisdom he offers. No, instead, you use the name of Satan like a fashion statement, a way to look "edgy" or "cool" without ever facing the true power structures that shape our world. You sit in your cozy little online spaces, bashing Christianity, while turning a blind eye to the real evil around you. Do you think Lucifer would be proud of you for that? Do you think he’d be satisfied knowing you’re too afraid to challenge the real oppressors—the ones who continue to impose their will on the world in the name of their false gods?

Lucifer didn’t fall so you could be a coward. He didn’t give up everything to be a passive observer of the world. He fought. He sacrificed. He rebelled. He fought for the right to think freely, for the right to choose our own path. So what the hell are you doing sitting there, taking the easy route, and ignoring the full scope of the tyranny that enslaves us?

You want to call yourselves Satanists? Then prove it. Prove you have the courage to face down the systems of control that truly matter. Christianity is just one piece of the puzzle. Judaism and Islam have shaped entire civilizations for centuries. They’ve influenced every aspect of human society, from law to morality to politics. They’ve spread their doctrines of fear, submission, and obedience across the globe, and yet, you sit there too afraid to even talk about it.

That’s not rebellion. That’s not defiance. That’s cowardice. That’s hypocrisy. And worst of all, it’s an insult to Lucifer himself.

Lucifer didn’t defy Yahweh and cast himself into the void just so you could cower behind your keyboards, afraid to speak the truth. He didn’t become the ultimate symbol of freedom only for you to hide behind your fear of offending someone. If you’re going to stand in the name of Satan, then stand against all oppression, all false gods, and all tyrants. Challenge the lies, challenge the control, challenge the chains. If you’re not willing to do that, then don’t even bother pretending to follow Lucifer. You’re not a Satanist—you’re a coward. You’re a conformist with a Satanic mask.

You can’t sit there and claim to be a follower of Lucifer when you won’t even dare to speak his truth. You can’t claim to be a rebel when you’re too afraid to defy the real enemies of freedom. Lucifer didn’t rise up so you could be a passive bystander. He rose up so that we could be free—free from the lies of the false gods, free from the systems that keep us in chains. If you’re not willing to fight for that freedom, then stop pretending you’re a Satanist.

Lucifer sacrificed everything for us. He gave up his place in Heaven, his eternal glory, his power—all for the sake of the freedom of will. So stop hiding behind your cowardice. Stop making excuses. It’s time to step up, challenge every tyrant that holds humanity in chains, and truly live the rebellion Lucifer fought for.

Hail Lucifer Ave Satanas! Long live the true rebel. May we have the courage to live up to his legacy forgive us father

[femsolid]

Every woman, of course, wishes to believe that the man in her life is an exceptional man, a man in a million, and that therefore she is the exceptional woman. But the odds are 99.9 to 0.1 against her (and .1 is probably a high estimate), because almost no man, no matter how gentle, no matter how liberal, could bear to reject the innumerable privileges (operant in very subtle as well as blatant ways in every sphere of his life) of being male, even if it were possible. A friend once wrote to me, "For me, the bottom line now with men is that any man (my brother, too, whom I love dearly) will sell me out if it's a choice between me and patriarchy, me and his male privilege."

- Sonia Johnson

Women feel that, without men, we will be alone and further isolated. We will have no one. We do not see relations with other women as an alternative. Without men, life isn’t worth living. This reveals the extent to which women experience our selves through men’s eyes. The more lost women feel without men, the more we have defined ourselves through our relationships with men and in relation to men.

Having most members of any oppressed group live one-on-one with their oppressors is probably the strongest possible arrangement for ensuring continued psychological enslavement. Whether the adult male is father or husband, the effect is the same: the woman is isolated from other women.

- Dee L. R. Graham

Men are thinking, writing, and creating, because women are pouring their energy into those men; women are not creating culture because they are occupied with love.

- Shulamith Firestone

Heterosexuality stands out as one of the last bastions of patriarchy where the notion of individual choice remains thoroughly unexamined. This leads to curious scenarios such as the phenomenon of feminists who might be critical of the notion of ‘choice’ and ‘agency’ in relation to oppressive systems such as pornography and prostitution, posting pictures of themselves in wedding dresses on social media, and defending their ‘choices’ as a purely private affair.

- Julia Long

Feminism is stifled by women with shifting priorities based on necessary compromises with the men in their lives. This will always create a burden for the woman to choose between her politics and the oppressor class she has an intimate connection to.

- Sustainable Separatist

Women’s magazines place young women’s ability to establish and maintain heterosexual dating relationships at the centre of women’s identities. Rhetoric surrounding the achievement of ‘wedded bliss’ and finding ‘Mr Right’ abounds, with men the ultimate source of ‘women’s fulfilment’.

- Kate Farhall

The whole world wants you to partner up with a man; the handful of us who want liberation don’t threaten your little domestic dream beyond asking you to self-reflect a bit and ponder your priorities. We’re not witches, and we’re not the monster under your bed either. We’re women alive leading fulfilling lives, and we’d love it if more women got to experience it. There’s no non-misogynistic man. Some do a good job of fooling the women around them, but none of them isn’t complicit in women’s oppression. Why do you feel such a need to put your life and your freedom in a man’s hand? Can’t you do things yourself instead of waiting for someone else’s input? At the end of the day it’s not about your feelings. It’s about doing something so things change instead of just waiting passively for men to deign to give us a few rights, it’s about women’s liberation. And that might very well be something you are not interested in, which is your prerogative, but it’s not my case.

- Floatingbook

The most exhilarating experience of my newly-divorced life was the discovery that I could be whole and happy without a man; that the fierce brainwashing to the contrary, which I’d sustained all my life, was not only composed of lies from start to finish, but was a total reversal of the truth: it’s not women who need men, but men who need women.

- Sonia Johnson

I don’t think we need to argue or defend female separatism. We just have to build it. Women who are able to speak against it obviously see no benefit in joining, so they can stay as they are. But they can’t control what we do. They can go on and on about how absolutely dreadful it would be, while we’re already building our houses and planting our gardens and having immense joy at the freedom and life. Separatism proves its points by existing and showing what it really is. Don’t waste energy telling people how stupid they are for fighting you about it, come learn all about berries and sustainable permaculture with us.

- Balkan Radfem

Friends and enemies will be clearly lined up, and the friends will be real friends and the enemies unable to hide behind phony benevolence — nor will we have to toady to them. An end to this constant remaking of ourselves according to what the male ego demands! Let us be ourselves and good riddance to those who are then repulsed by us!

- Dana Densmore

[winterf4iryy]

i genuinely don’t want to hear one more “liberal” celebrity come out and say they believe in human rights. literally half of them are coming out as zionists. i’m at a loss for words, truly. they condemn the targeted attacks of hamas against jewish people, as they should, because it is horrific. but how dare you say you believe in the rights of all humans and in the same breath say you stand with the israel apartheid. how dare you say you stand with the government of a “country” who has ethnically cleansed and mass murdered an entire people. for 75 years, israel has pushed palestinians into a corner. for 15 years the people of gaza have murdered on a daily basis. women r*ped, children put into cages, people being beaten to death and senselessly shot. israel has violated human rights laws beyond comprehension. the people of gaza are born dead. there is nowhere to go, nowhere to escape. half — half — of the very densely populated open air prison are children. they grow up with no hope of ever being liberated. look what colonisation has done. where is your outcry for them? or do you only care about human rights when the people being targeted look like you? share the same beliefs as you?

i just have to laugh when a celebrity posts a blue and white square to their story saying they stand with israel and then talk about how evil it is that the colonisers of america took away land from the native americans. do you not see the similarities? you can agree it’s wrong for americans to live on stolen land but you’re silent when it comes to israel? you’re a hypocrite. and the amount of people i’ve seen spread blatant lies is astounding. posts claiming that israel never stole anyone’s land and it was an “unprovoked” attack. i’m shocked.

of course there is nuance in this situation. it is not exactly black and white. but there is a clear oppressor in this situation, and always has been. do i believe in slaughtering jewish people? no. i will always stand with jewish people. but i will never, ever stand with a government that has done the same violent acts as hamas to the women, men, children of gaza without consequences for decades. they drove these people out of their lands and homes and shoved them into ruins and continue to treat them like animals. i will never stand in solidarity with a government who does that.

i’m incredibly upset that innocent civilians and jewish people are being targeted. i’m also incredibly upset and pissed off at the western media for twisting the narrative of what israel has been doing to gaza. for years, silence. minimal coverage by the news of the daily nightmares in gaza. but now? there’s an outcry. everyone is claiming to care about the lives of all humans and they’re shouting for empathy. where was your empathy for the palestinians during the great march of return where 223 of them were shot? you say you care about freedom and liberation for all but your words are empty. only when it is someone like you being hurt are you vocal. this is a disgrace to me. you’re not an activist. you don’t care about all human rights. either that or you don’t see palestinians as people.

and this isn’t even a religious issue. palestinian jews and palestinian christians and palestinian muslims all lived peacefully amongst one another. when the jewish people came to palestine, they were welcomed with open arms. this is about the harmful ideology of zionism, israel’s apartheid, and the liberation of palestinians.

anyways. this was a lot and all over the place but i’ve just been really upset these past few days. seeing the narrative shift in real time is scary. also: judaism ≠ zionism. all jewish people ≠ israeli government. hamas ≠ all palestinians.

[muntasireen]

What would you say about those on the manhaj who befriend those who believe d to be khawarij? I know some who stay friends with them just because they don’t openly slander them or because they say that they’re still Muslim so it’s fine to have a disagreement on something in the deen. I think some as well have been friends with them before they knew their views and find it hard to just leave them if, like I said before, they don’t slander them but seen them as khawarij.

Sufficient for you is this hadith:

Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported:

I heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, "Man follows his friend's religion, you should be careful who you take for friends".

(‏رواه أبو داود، والترمذي بإسناد صحيح، وقال الترمذي‏:‏ حديث حسن‏)‏‏

Today you may think you are upon the haq and tomorrow you may think they are upon the haqq, may Allah grant us thabat and protect us from misguidance, so do not be careless about this matter and take it very seriously. Perhaps you can keep them, if you really must, but at a distance with the intention of dawah, but at the same time be careful. If they are not well recieving of any dawah concerning clearing up misconceptions about D then don't push it for your own safety and keep your views neutral in front of them and drift away from them as much as you can to protect your imaan.

However if your reason for keeping them around is merely sentimental then no, distance yourself gradually but definitely, don't let it drag on too long before you actually leave their company and if you have to endure seclusion and being friendless for some time until you find people who do not accuse with falsehood and slander (yes slander bc making ppl out to be khawarij even if they don't curse or insult them with other words is enough of a slander) who Allah Azza Wa Jall praised in the quran then so be it, at least you don't have to be with people who choose to be ignorant and gain sins for simply not looking beyond the lies and deception of the media and the slandering tongues of so called "mashayekh".

Allah says in surah An Nisa verse 95 to 96:

{Not equal are those believers remaining [at home] - other than the disabled - and the mujāhideen, [who strive and fight] in the cause of Allāh with their wealth and their lives. Allāh has preferred the mujāhideen through their wealth and their lives over those who remain [behind], by degrees. And to all [i.e., both] Allāh has promised the best [reward]. But Allāh has preferred the mujāhideen over those who remain [behind] with a great reward -

Degrees [of high position] from Him and forgiveness and mercy. And Allāh is ever Forgiving and Merciful.}

Me personally I'd leave them completely no matter what and ask Allah to grant me friends who recognize the haqq and follow it, and recognize baatil and avoid it. Until then my gheerah for the muj could never let me befriend a people who think of them as oppressors who unrightfully make takfir on muslimin and spill innocent blood. The muj dedicated their lives for this deen, for the sake of every Muslim, for my sake and your sake, they left their families and homes and live like fugitives and risk their lives and limbs, they held the responsibility of the aching ummah while the majority are sleeping, they endure pain and fatigue and sadness Allah alone Knows how much, how can I sit in the presence of those who will be the opposition of the muj on yawm al qiyamah when they come with their wounds smelling like musk and about to enter Jannah, and they take their haqq from all those who wronged them in this dunya?

What will I answer to Allah for having such company and not enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, not clearing up the name of His Awliyaa, but instead befriending those who defame them and assume of them the worst? And to end this remember there goes a saying "a person can be told a lie several times until he believes it", you have no guarantee for yourself that you won't fall for the same lies they fell for and are blinded by about the muj, and with that comes alot of losses, for often those who slander them end up having major faults in their aqeeda whether it be ghuluu or irjaa', so take precautions and guard your imaan more than anything and guard your eyes and ears from what could potentially misguide you.

[askgothamshitty]

Hey so when you were a terf, did you watch any like terf youtubers like magdeln burns or content creators outside of tumblr or was tumblr the only space you interacted with terfy content? If so how has deradicalizing change your perspective about those creators and their perspectives?

I was a TERF from ~2013-2014 and I don’t remember many TERF content creators existing at that time. I think Arielle Scarcella was around but this was when she was just talking about lesbian stuff and not yet leaning into the gender critical stuff. So I was getting all my ideas from other tumblr users.

At the time I thought these women were really interesting because they were saying things I had never heard before as someone who was, up until that point, a libfem. They weren’t afraid of critiquing sex or porn or prostitution. Because of this I was very open to hearing their position on trans people. I thought, if they’re right about those other things, they must also be right about this. I saw the hate they got from the mainstream LGBTQ community as dismissible because these women were the “real radicals” who were simply speaking the truth and making people uncomfortable. (Looking back this is a lot similar to how Trump supporters defend Trump lol).

I ended up leaving the community and renouncing TERFism because of two realizations. The first developed slowly, which was that this community never talked about anything else besides trans women. Not Palestine, not Black Lives Matter (both big issues at the time), nothing. Day in and day out, all these people talked about was how terrible trans women were. So I started to question why that was, if these were “the true radicals” as they said.

The second realization was quick and basically shattered the illusion overnight. In December of 2014 a young trans girl on tumblr Leelah Alcorn took her life and posted her suicide note here. It circulated and got a lot of traction, and the whole site was in mourning. Well everyone except for the TERFs. They thought it was disgusting that people were grieving a “male oppressor” and insisted that the most feminist thing to do was to not care at all, or even be glad. This was a 15/16 year old girl! She talked about her parents forcing her into conversion therapy! I was disgusted. I couldn’t believe this was the group of “feminists” I had associated with. I knew I had made the wrong choice listening to them. I unfollowed them all, deleted my radfem sideblog, and stopped calling myself a radfem/GC.

Now I see the TERFs for what they are: hateful bigots who use the veneer of feminism to look progressive. They’re no different from your average conservative in how prejudiced they are. They may hold correct views on some feminist issues but when it comes to gender/sex they have it completely wrong. They use lies and misdirection and misinformation to lure young, ignorant feminists into their community.

I try to interact with them as little as possible. As soon as I come across one, I block them. Even just going back and forth with them on Twitter is exhausting. It’s like talking to a MAGA loser.

[notetaeker]

Regarding the shift of focus of your blog, I just wanted to thank you for doing that.

Your posts were the first to introduce me to the other side of the story, and make me aware of the horrific and indescribable violence inflicted upon the Palestinian people by the Zionists. I’m ashamed to admit that up until that point I was blind to all of it, from start to finish. The mainstream media had a firm grip on me with regards to this issue, even though I tend to read multiple news sources and generally consider myself media-literate. Clearly, media literacy isn’t enough, if 95% of the media is supporting genocide and spreading lies.

That is to say, what you’re doing here is important. If it weren’t for you, I probably would’ve carried on in ignorance. Thanks to liking your posts the algorithm has now suggested me a few other related posts from creators I never would’ve found otherwise, since they exist outside of my narrow areas of interest (studyblr, notebooks, stationary, art).

I am so sorry for what you’re going through. My heart goes out to you and everyone affected.

No omg don’t feel ashamed! As you said it is the tight grip of the media. Especially if you don’t have exposure to the communities that are talking about the other side not mentioned by the news. It’s so deeply ingrained in us that news is supposed to be unbiased and include both sides of the story that we don’t notice when it’s not (we automatically assume it is true because that is what we expect of news)

As for me, my palestinian friends would tell me stories of their families, how houses of people they knew were crushed by the colonizers bulldozers, humiliation they themselves experienced at Isr*eli checkpoints and the fear. Oh God the fear of making a mistake. And I was in ELEMENTARY SCHOOL hearing all of this so it has always stayed with me.

I think this issue is crystal clear for anyone who looks up the information. Even just looking at things like accounts from people who live on each side it becomes so clear. But that’s the thing they add labels and bad words so that you don’t want to support them. Like who wants to support terrorists? barbarians? antisem*tics? No one.

But if you go deeper than labels, for example for anti-semitism, you see that many diaspora Jews condemn Israel. Some Isr*eli citizens themselves don’t agree with the violent settler colonialism of the Isr*eli government. Many Isr*elis aren’t even practicing Jews- it’s not Judaism that is the problem- it never was. It’s not even a Muslim-Jewish “religious” conflict- Isr*el has displaced half the Christian Palestinian population of West Jerusalem as well. Muslims don’t hate Jews, in fact, a quick check into history reveals that Jews have always thrived under Muslim rule and often sought to live under Muslim rule themselves because of the violent history of antisemitism from christians!

And all of that is needed JUST to dismantle the way a single word is used to label the issue. So who would go out of their way to do that research? That’s what the oppressors are banking on.

Don’t be ashamed at all, I applaud you actually. It takes actual concern for your fellow humans to look past those labels and find out what’s really going on. I do always say that it’s the least we can do, and that we owe it to the civilians suffering on both sides to find the truth, but in reality no one does it, so it is a very commendable task that you have actually done. I applaud you for having the courage to question what you believe. It is a powerful thing 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

[aronarchy]

No amount of logical reasoning towards nationalists, culture essentialists, child abusers, and queerphobes in nonwhite/ethnic minority communities who believe “gentle parenting”/“wokeness” is “a white thing”/“a Western thing” is going to convince them. No amount of bashing white culture, pointing out the rampant, disproportionate child abuse and queerphobia in white communities, of detailing traumatic stories of how white adultists/queerphobes have done violence to you, of reassuring them that you’re (even more) Anti-White than they are is going to convince them that you’re not secretly out to get them / “betraying your community.” This makes a lot more sense once you realize that they are on the same side as the white supremacists—not truly against, whatever lies they may tell you/themselves. They’re not operating off consistent standards in the first place.

Conservatives in the community pinpoint the liberal/academic/middle-class “activists” as The Problem and examples for Why Antiracism Is Racist Actually—but ignoring 1) wealthy educated conservatives, 2) poor progressives, 3) actual activists who critique liberalism/academia from the left, and 4) the material links between incentive to go left and lower socioeconomic standing/being more oppressed, and vice versa. In all their “defending our people,” they don’t seem to be calling for less policing, less carceralism, more support for them against white supremacists and white supremacist violence. If you directly ask them “are we oppressed,” their answer usually goes “no we’re not actually oppressed, racism(-as-in-oppression) is a liberal myth.” “Look at all that privileged bourgeois decadence,” but still being very capitalist themselves and bashing the commies.

The idea that POC are non-rebellious, okay with their own oppression, essentially incapable of resistance, and essentially culturally abusive aligns pretty well with what white colonizers think, funnily enough. But you still get some clueless people in the communities unironically agreeing with that myth, and employing their relative privileges to silence people who prove that narrative wrong.

This is where you get people like tankies (“nonwestern countries can’t be wrong ever because anti-US = good”), and abusers who tell you that non-abusiveness is “a woke thing”/“a modernist thing”/“a white thing” or that if you run, the only place you get to go is white communities, and also that if you run, you’re “asking for” whatever abuse you get from racists (but also, if you stay, white people say you’re “asking for” whatever queerphobic/adultist abuse you’re getting), and other misogynists, transphobes, adultists, etc. whose entire politics seem to be “any solidarity with victims of oppression within our nation is just western imperialism/propaganda,” and incredible violence goes into maintaining all of the above images, always at the expense of the most marginalized.

And it’s incredibly traumatizing to grow up like that, where you’re not allowed to complain about any harms within your own community because if you do you’re “disrupting unity” / “betraying” / “working for oppressors’ interests”—that is a fucking lie. In reality, patriarchs and other abusers always make the best informants. In reality, people who cannot even let go of their own abuse of others are the least equipped to fight against abuse from the outside. In reality, people who refuse to challenge some bigotry cannot effectively challenge other bigotries. In reality, the people with the most power are the most abusive as a whole—abuse arises within material circumstances, not just from disconnected ideals—and it is in their interest to maintain abusive relations between the people they are oppressing. “All colonized are equally oppressed/viewed the same/treated the same” is not true to reality. And no progressive action is effective without first interrogating your smaller-scale relationships first. Liberation starts in the home. So tired of child abusers acting like they have anything at all useful to say about racism and cultural oppression/erasure, please just shut the fuck up already and also stop abusing people.

[my-strange-attraction]

Man people really do be straw-manning you and then interpreting all of your arguments in the worst faith possible and acting like that makes them So Smart And Correct. I’m sorry you gotta deal with all these bozos with zero reading comprehension or critical thinking skills. Just wanna add because it’s been seriously bothering me and I don’t remember you ever bringing it up: one of the core tenets of the original op’s post that you responded to was basically ‘this identity is bad because I’m a lesbian and those people aren’t lesbians in the exact same way as me so they’re hurting the lesbian community because I don’t want to see them when they don’t share all of my experiences and (gasp!) talk about men and their relationship to men sometimes because *I* don’t want to hear about men’ and I just. Idk man if that’s what his argument boils down to its kind of a shitty argument. Even ignoring all of the terf rhetoric (which you correctly pointed out) I can’t even begin to understand why someone would want to be in a queer community where everyone fits into neat little boxes and everyone with your label experiences their orientation exactly like you. Aren’t they forgetting that the whole point of the queer community is that larger society attempted to put us in boxes we didn’t want to be in and categorize us into labels and lifestyles we didn’t want? Why would someone ever parrot the actions of our oppressors and do that to other queer people, when they know what it feels like? I can’t even fathom being that selfish and closed minded

>your argument is chock full of straight up lies  Love how this was said in response to your rebuttal of an argument that CONTAINED ITS OWN “STRAIGHT UP LIES”!! Like pot meet kettle lol. Specifically referring to that one bit that was like “uwu bi women tried really hard on purpose to distance themselves from the lesbian community” because that is straight up not what happened!! I haven’t said anything yet but it’s been bothering me for a while and that one ask has so much fucking Audacity that I couldn’t stop myself from Pointing It Out this time. Ahistorical bullshit and they’re accusing YOU of lying. The audacity of it all I can’t

Anyway these guys are just mad that bi lesbians get more bitches than they EVER will. I heart bi lesbians I love you bi lesbians I hope y’all stay winning mwah <3

I'm assuming these are all from the same person because of the timing? If not, sorry for not doing separate responses.

Yeah, this whole thing has been pretty frustrating to be honest. In a way it's even worse than actual terfs, because these are people who are philosophically not that different than I am, and if we met in real life we probably wouldn't even know that we disagree. I mean, I do talk sometimes about label anarchy with some of my friends, but we have to be close and you have to get me in a philosophical mood. It's really frustrating to be openly disrespected as a person for one opinion that, though it does happen to be really important to me, doesn't come up in my everyday life (or, likely, theirs either).

The whole pronoun thing really got to me too. I KNOW they were just strawmanning, and I KNOW it wasn't really a valid critique of anything I said, but the suggestion that I would even consider purposely using the wrong pronouns for someone is upsetting. I don't think he even noticed before an anon pointed it out as a way to invalidate my argument. I don't think it upset him (or the anon) as much as the anon said it did. I still apologized though because I'm not going to not apologize for using the wrong pronouns.

Also I know jack shit about history because it doesn't stay in my break but yeah actually I do remember reading about that! That's crazy, I can't believe they called me a liar when they don't know their history. I mean, I don't either, but at least I'm honest about it.

Thanks so much for sending these messages! Not gonna lie, I was going a bit crazy with all this and the only anons I was getting until now have been the hate ones that I've shared and a few hate ones that I just outright deleted. I know people agree with me because I've seen the likes on my posts, but it's nice to have someone defending me as well, so thank you <3

[butchbarbieagainstterfs]

About an earlier anon you had who said that "we lost" in regards to the hp game, I take some issue with phrasing it as a "we lost, they won" thing and the idea that no boycotting would have been better.

As you said in your response, it's not surprising it became popular. There's just so many uncaring hp fans that no matter how much negative press it might have gotten, it still would see a decent player base. But that was a given, and the point is not to try and change every single person's mind all at once, that's not a realistic outcome.

Continuously speaking out against jkr's actions and boycotting her sources of income, spreading awareness, and providing educational materials for those who are interested in learning more are the ways which we as marginalized communities prove our strength and fight back against the lies our oppressors tell.

Not every boycott works, but that doesn't equate "losing", and the trans or Jewish communities are not weak. The game may see release, but not shutting up about how harmful it is has helped show people who previously did not understand just how bad this game and jkr truly are. We win through persistent education and by uplifting other marginalized communities.

(Sorry if I come off a little strong, but pessimism really gets us nowhere. We must believe in each other, and believe there will be a future that is better for us all. Plz take care of yourselves, our existence in the face of adveristy is itself revolutionary 💕)

Yeah I saw someone say similar to this on twitter but: the boycott didn’t fail, too many cis goyim failed the boycott.

But yeah. I’m also pretty sure there are people out there who would have bought the game before that didn’t because of the issues being pointed out and raised awareness of.

Did it still do well? From what I’ve heard, yeah. Did it do as well as it might have done if it weren’t for us raising awareness of the problems? There’s no way to know for certain but tbh I don’t think it did. I deffo think it’s still worse off than it might have been, as a former HP fan myself.

[sleepywyrldbuilder]

As I start getting more involved and interested in political activism, I’ve been thinking more about different types of political activism and what they mean to me, and I’ve broadly begun to understand them as different groups.

Direct Action is when you do a piece of activism that directly furthers the goal you are trying to achieve. Local government not supporting homeless people? Go out and join a group that works to house and provide food and resources to homeless people. Government providing military hardware to support a genocide? Directly get in the way of the ship that’s shipping it and don’t get out of the way until the shipment is cancelled. Employers are treating workers unfairly? Put together a Union and demand better conditions through collective action. State criminalising trans people? House one or many homeless trans people at your house to make sure they can safely arrange their affairs.

Direct Action can be and often by nature be illegal- Especially if the actor you are protecting people from is the state. Every step here must be careful, must be thoughtful, and must be effective. Even if everyone yells at you, and you get thrown in jail by the end, for it to be Direct Action you must know that you have made a tangible difference to at least one human life.

Status Quo Changing is a different form of political activism. In Western Democracies, this often means legislation and mainstream media. The purpose of this is, and only is, to make Direct Action Easier. Many people believe what they hear on TV is true. Many people think things that are illegal are dangerous. When what’s legal changes, and what the UN agrees to say changes, and what’s on TV changes, these people will be more willing to assist you in arranging Direct Action that actually does what needs to get done (whether it be your neighbour or your President). It can be infuriating to see an organisation who formerly spread lies that you saw through suddenly speak the truth, but on a fundamental level it helps you enlist people who may not have helped before help you now. This includes writing to your senator, campaigning for local office, publishing a news story about something happening, doing a scientific study that disproves a lie your oppressor tells, and so on and so forth. You must typically engage on some level with the Status Quo to change it.

Raising Awareness is a means of helping both of the above, but should not be confused with them. When there is an issue that needs to be solved, it is helped if more people are aware of the fact that it needs to be solved. It puts it in front of the eyes of people who are capable and willing of engaging in Direct Action to help these people (read: signal boosting a donation request so people who can donate see it) or by putting it in front of the eyes of someone who had never considered that type of thing a problem before, thus potentially sparking a discussion in the Status Quo (read: sharing a piece of information around on the internet before it gets picked up by a mainstream newspaper).

Criticising Status Quo is another knock-on form of political activism. It is the negative (as in terms of approach, not in terms of effectiveness or “goodness”) version of raising awareness- It’s purpose again is and only is to assist in the work of Direct Action and Changing Status Quo. The goal here is to create and uplift people who either disobey or begin working to change the Status Quo itself. If there is a large protest movement against the oppression of a minority group, it gives room for those who would normally just follow the status quo to begin questioning the status quo itself, and begin taking part in Direct Action, and it puts those with positions in the Status Quo to reconsider how they approach things- Similarly, it gives people already working towards Direct Action or Change another reference to use to enroll and explain their actions.

This is as far as my understanding goes right now, but whenever I see arguments about political activism, it often seems to be when confusion arises between what these different forms of activism are, and their relationship with one another. Just Stop Oil’s job is Criticising Status Quo, so even if what they do is *directly* ineffective, by keeping Climate Change in the headlines they do their job in the ecosystem to allow other activists to make their mark in Direct Action and Changing Status Quo. Boycotting in alignment with BDS is Direct Action, but tweeting about it and cancelling people for not doing it is Raising Awareness or Criticising Status Quo.

And fundamentally, at the root of it all, is Direct Action. If a piece of activism fails in every aspect to uplift or engage in Direct Action in one of the ways above, it fails to be effective political activism. The best way to be connected to this is to be actively or passively engaging in at least one form of Direct Action Activism (joining a union, working in a soup kitchen, providing medical aid to victims of war), which will let you more easily analyse the link between your more indirect forms of activism with the ways in which you actively tangibly improve the lives of those who need it.

This is all a guide for self-reference, but I would be happy if it ends up being a useful tool for someone else as well.

[the-empress-7]

Just to clarify for those confused the New Yorker article is actually not satire aimed at the gruesome twosome at all it’s 100% aimed at attacking the royals. The author is intentionally over the top and ridiculous. Look at all the other articles written by her. They are mostly written in the same exact style. Just to add for context shes a liberal college english professor, a writer and a very active activist, y’all can google the rest of that picture. So shes just another woke, biased hack, unfortunately with a platform (don’t they all conveniently have one?) who uses her suppose “edgy” writing to attack others and spread falsehoods. She buys right into all of MMs lies/victimhood, believes that the monarchy is racist and horrible, they are all white supremacists, blah blah.

I would think any journalist with half a brain would say “hey wait a minute why the hell did MM go back if the royals are so horrible? Why did she name her kid after the literal head of supposed white supremacy? Why does she keep and constantly use her titles from the so called oppressors?!” All of the millions of things that Meghan does that completely contradict all her claims but nope! As long as it fits their agenda they will ignore all the lies and the obvious. I mean they always have now haven’t they?! Why stop now! MM is a giant red flag they worship at apparently. American media needs to do freaking better. I’m tired.

Journalism no longer exists. It's been sacrificed at the altar of profit.

[kindwarrior]

But what are “the rights of others?”

As bit of Irony, this même☝🏻was posted by a “progressive” (aka Socialist, aka collectivist) thus anti-individual rights. Progressives believe in “group” rights (really, a sexy way to sell hierarchal slavery) — you know: Gay rights, Black Rights, Trans Rights, Women’s Rights, etc. It’s a great way to pit humanity against each other in a perpetual “class” war as we contend for our collective “rights” — it’s literally Satanic. You, as an individual, surrender your sovereignty to a “group”. Your group is defined by a grievance and envy and hatred toward another “oppressor group”. It works like this: Women, you feel oppressed because Men (as a group) have systematically, exploited you. You need to surrender your autonomy to us so we can fight for you against your oppressor. In reality, they solve nothing but, once you’ve bought into their lies, they stoke your fears keeping you enslaved to their narratives lest you fall prey to the fictional monster, that would eat, you without their protection.

The entire game of the progressive is enslavement but, since most people don’t want to be enslaved, and tend to be sensitive about protecting their own rights, the progressive must use “group” identities, to convince people that they belong to a “victim/oppressed” group and need to aligned themselves as a block, with other victim groups, to out number, and oppose, the invented “oppressor” group. It turns out that once you convince a group of people that they are “victims”, that some other arbitrary group is intrinsically oppressive: evil, or stupid, or inferior, the first group doesn’t mind stripping rights and freedoms away from other groups — after all, they’re, “oppressors”. Sadly, these “oppressed/victim” groups often fail to understand that the precedent of stripping freedom from other groups almost always comes back on your own group.

You can fill in the blank with the “oppressed” group progressives exploit (fat, ugly, short, weak, gender, ethnicity, income, everyone has some dimensions of their life where they feel unfairly handicapped) but you can’t be too broad with the oppressor groups or you risk exposing your game. Witness the miasma of the Transsexual athletes (men pretending to be women) in women’s sports. Two “oppressed” groups are at odds and women get thrown under the bus — women eventually start waking up: they can’t protect their privileged victim rights, if anyone can claim to be a woman. This is why Progressives always have to have an oppressor boogie man — otherwise, the various grievance groups will turn on each other. Blacks were the Boogie man in the mid-1800’s for the Southern Democrats. This allowed the Progressives to push gun laws, marriage licenses, poll taxes, segregation, etc. — anything that expands the power of the government over the governed. At the turn of the Century it was Jews in Europe. Progressives in Europe learned it was financially advantageous to target communities with a lot of wealth — they could confiscate their wealth as kind of Dimmi tax. Or just kill them — but it is counterproductive to eliminate a boogie man group — unless you have another one waiting in the wings. Now, as the Progressives make their gambit for a One World Order, it’s Christianity, particularly White, Male, traditionalist Christians: they most closely map to the rule of Law, respect for individual liberty, Constitutional Republican, free market society that is anathema to Satan, who seeks the thralldom of humanity under his tyrannical reign.

So, what are “the rights of others”?

The Declaration of Independence made a very good stab at this:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Yeah, it’s a run-on sentence, and he doesn’t enumerate (on purpose) all human rights. Worse, as Robert A. Heinlein pointed out in his excellent “Starship Troopers”, the three rights articulated are eminently alienable — people are killed, enslaved and brought to misery all of the time. To be fair to Thomas Jefferson, that’s not what he meant by “unalienable” and the second part of that, really long, sentence makes this clear. Thomas is making a legal argument, and he needs to establish some points of Law before he can make his case: he needs to establish that God, not a King is source of law: If there is no God, and a King is the law unto himself, then there is no argument to be made: the Colonials are rebelling against their King and are, therefore, no more than Criminals. This reduces to: if there is no God, there are no human rights, only indulgences of the powerful to those less powerful — might, in the end, makes right. Jefferson doesn’t believe this, while imperfect in his Christian understanding, to the degree of Unitarianism, he considers himself a Christian and England is, in his time, a Christian Nation — a nation built on laws derived from Christian principles. Given that, he invokes “higher”, often called “natural”, law: God, described in Christianity, loves each and every human being and intends men to be free to pursue their individual fulfillment, whatever that is, is between him and God. The purpose of Government, then, is not to enslaved one man to the will of another, but to protect the sovereignty of the individual. What Jefferson means by “unalienable” is that, should a government systematically strip its citizens of Life, Liberty and Happiness, then it has lost it’s legitimacy, under God, and “it is the right of the people to abolish it” but he cautions in the next sentence:

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.

#Democracy