#from very liberal regimes

[jewish-microwave-laser]

really good opinion piece by hamza howidy, a gazan man who is living in exile in europe. he was tortured and imprisoned by hamas twice for protesting against them, and now is helping start a new organization called realign for palestine advocating for peace over violence and pragmatism over extremism in activism for palestinian liberation!

i'll also be posting some quotes from this article by themselves bc i've found that the short and punchy posts tend to get more eyes than the long ones

[...] For three consecutive days, thousands of Gazans risked their lives to raise their voices against Hamas, yet their efforts have been overlooked by the so-called pro-Palestine movement in the West and by most of the news media as well. As someone who once tried to protest Hamas and ended up in their jails and torture chambers, I understand what this neglect feels like. I know the deep sense of betrayal that has touched every protester, the painful realization that they have been abandoned, left alone with no one willing to hear them.  It's as if the world has resigned them to a fate of living under Hamas’ rule, as if their suffering is too inconvenient and does not fit into the Western narrative of Palestine, which is why they have forsaken the actual people of Gaza, like me. Last week's protests were a watershed moment for Gazans, when so many in Gaza finally understood the true meaning of fake solidarity ‒ that to the Western "pro-Palestine" movement, Palestinians are not seen as real people with real struggles but as tools to be used in their ideological battles. Not only were the protests ignored by "allies" in the West, but so were the lives of the protesters and all they represent. 

'Pro-Palestine' activists protest for Columbia student. Where are they for protester killed by Hamas?

Hamas wasted no time in going after the leaders of the protests, threatening, torturing and even killing them. The family of Oday Nasser Al Rabay, 22, says the protester was tortured to death by Hamas simply for demanding a free Gaza ‒ free from Hamas and free from war. Where was the outrage from the "pro-Palestine movement" activists? Where were the protests in Western capitals for Oday? Nowhere. Because he did not fit into their ideological framework because his killing was not useful and too inconvenient to their narrative. Meanwhile, when a protester with a distinctly different profile ‒ Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student ‒ finds himself detained in the United States, the pro-Palestinian activists who claim to advocate for the oppressed wasted no time in flooding Western streets with protests calling for his release. His arrest became an emblem of resistance, sparking global campaigns to bring him home. But what about the young Palestinian from Gaza who, without the protection of international institutions, was tortured to death for his dissent? Oday was left to rot in obscurity, his brutal murder by Hamas nothing more than an inconvenient fact for the same movement that fervently defended Mahmoud. This stark contrast is not only a failure of solidarity ‒ it's also an indictment of the hollow, opportunistic nature of the so-called pro-Palestine movement. Mahmoud, a student in the West, was elevated to the status of martyr. Oday, a young man from Gaza, was left to die at the hands of the very regime that Western allies refuse to confront. The hypocrisy is staggering.  If the pro-Palestinian movement is unwilling to stand with the Palestinians in Gaza—those who are risking everything to break free from the shackles of Hamas—then what kind of movement is this?  If the pro-Palestine movement cannot recognize the bravery, the sacrifices and the legitimate demands of those fighting to end the reign of terror in Gaza, to end this war and to rebuild their city free of Iranian influence, then it exposes itself as nothing more than a vehicle for political expediency. It is a movement that uses Palestinian lives when convenient and discards them when they are inconvenient. If this is the solidarity these "allies" offer, then it is an insult to the struggle for justice, an empty gesture that does nothing to advance the cause of true liberation.

[heritageposts]

Secret South African documents reveal that Israel offered to sell nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, providing the first official documentary evidence of the state's possession of nuclear weapons. The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa's defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret. The documents, uncovered by an American academic, Sasha Polakow-Suransky, in research for a book on the close relationship between the two countries, provide evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons despite its policy of "ambiguity" in neither confirming nor denying their existence.

. . . continues at the guardian (24th of may, 2010)

here's also a research paper published in 2004, which, looking at declassified south african documents, lays out apartheid south africa's rational for acquiring nuclear weapons (bombing, or 'deterring,' black liberation groups):

[psychotrenny]

Imperial Core Liberals love "forgetting" that a diversity of political opinions exist in other countries the second they see someone parroting an Imperialist talking point who happens to be from whatever country they're currently obsessed with intervening in. Like they'll take a single tweet from Juana B. Comprador saying "Thank you America for overthrowing that tyrant and bringing my people Freedom and Hamburger" as proof that Imperialist interference is good and anyone who disagrees is just a cruel, out of touch Westoid that's too arrogant to care about authentic lived experiences. And like you don't even need to think in Marxist terms of like class interest and national contradictions etc. to realise how stupid this; simple common sense should tell you "People in the Third World are not a hive mind; finding one individual who says a thing does not mean everyone in their nation agrees".

But that very simple and obvious fact is inconvenient to the self image of a "progressive" Imperialist, and so they simply don't think about it. Even when they're forced to admit that differences of opinion exist, they find some rhetorical framing to present such dissent as automatically illegitimate. Like clearly anyone from X country who disagrees with them is just a Russian agent or brainwashed stooge of the regime, not a free thinker that truly speaks for the people. It's a form of argument that relies on the patterns of dehumanisation that people in the Imperial Periphery are subjected to; as anonymised masses that lack any meaningful individuality, an "authentic" speaker for one is an authentic speaker for all. Their value in any conversation starts and ends as rhetorical constructs to affirm what you already believed; the complex thoughts and feelings of countless living humans do nothing but get in the way

[ave-atqu3-vale]

Mandalorians as Jewish Allegory

First of all, we have this quote right here:

"We'll rebuild [Mandalore]. Isn't that our history? For thousands of years, we have been on the verge of extinction, and for thousands of years we have survived." ―Din Djarin

If you just replace the word Mandalore with Israel, it is a completely plausible thing for a Jewish person to say.

Anyway, on to my essay:

History:

Both Mandalorians and Jews have an indigenous homeland that is intrinsic to their culture and belief system, (Mandalore and Israel respectively). Throughout their entire history, they have been consistently under attack from various regimes seeking to commit genocide against them, (Jedi, Empire for Mandalorians, Romans, Nazis, Soviets, Arab colonialism for Jews), and yet each group has managed to remain alive and retain their culture. The Siege of Mandalore has a lot of parallels to the destruction of the Temple, and the Mandalorian Purges are very similar to the antisemitic Pogroms. Both groups are forced out of their indigenous homelands and into a diaspora, under which they are consistently hunted and attacked. Eventually, both groups regain control of their homeland from the colonizers who held previous rule over it.

Culture:

Mandalorians are either born into the culture or adopt the Creed, which is similar to born Jews and Converts. There are groups of Orthodox Mandalorians, such as the Children of the Watch, who observe the traditional laws regarding the Creed, as well as headcoverings, (similar to Orthodox Jewish people). In contrast, there are also more liberal factions of both Mandalorians and Jews. There are specific foods and religious clothing associated with both groups, their own languages, their own mythical beasts. Also, both cultures have a ceremonial bath/Mikvah associated with rituals and conversion.

Overall, I think it's fair to say that Mandalorians are an excellent allegory for Jewish people. Mandalorians are Space Jews. You can't change my mind.

This Is The Way

Am Yisrael Chai

[komsomolka]

The mythology of Red Army mass rapes in Berlin (and elsewhere throughout Germany) was slow to development in the post-WWII anti-Soviet climate. Even in 1945, as the Soviets and US collaborated to secure and rebuild a defeated Germany, Western generated rumours were being spread of the Red Army committing between 20,000 and 150,000 rapes throughout Germany (not just Berlin). As there was no documented evidence surrounding these rumours, no mainstream historian took them seriously (although the Western far-right ideologues continued to espouse Goebbels’ ahistorical ramblings). This changed with the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. In 1992, two (bourgeois) German feminists – named , Helke Zander and Barbara Yor – published a book entitled ‘Liberators and Liberated’, within which they ahistorically stated that the Red Army had committed 2 million rapes throughout Germany during the closing months of WWII. This was a dramatic reworking of Goebbels’ main anti-Soviet idea, and a massive increase in supposed ‘victims’, but a logical assumption of how these ‘authors’ arrived at this number reveals the fallacy of their argument. This incorrect number was arrived at using the following flawed methodology. Zander and Yor focused on a single Berlin Hospital for the years 1945-1946, and assessed the births that occurred there. For both years it was reported that around 500 babies were born respectively, with 15-20 fathers being recorded as ‘Russian’. In two or three cases it was reported that the pregnancy was caused by rape. These two ‘authors’ then ignored the fact that the vast majority of pregnancies were consensual, and assumed that ALL were the product of rape. They then presented Goebbels’ Nazi German propaganda of the Red Army raping all German women between the ages of 8-80 years, and concocted the arbitrary figure of ‘2 million’ as an ‘estimate’ of supposed rapes committed throughout the Soviet occupied areas of Germany. (These two ‘authors’, incidentally, remain ‘silent’ about the well documented rapes carried-out in Germany by US and British troops). However, even after this highly unreliable book was published, the idea of ‘2 million’ rapes did not gain much traction until the British historian Anthony Beevor published his ‘Fall of Berlin’ in 2002, within which he repeats without question the research of Zander and Yor, and perpetuates the anti-Soviet rhetoric of Goebbels’ Nazi German propaganda. This is the history behind how the Red Army was misrepresented by Nazi Germany and modern German and British revisionist ‘historians’ sympathetic to the political rightwing.

Since the collapse of the Berlin Wall, German people have been tired of having to repent for the holocaust and destruction they brought to the world during the 1930’s and 1940’s. They have found solace in a type of fiction made fact, that demonises the USSR and equates Stalin with Hitler. This alternative history has gained a certain credence through the decisions of endorsement made by various European organisations, and of course, the European Parliament. Coupled with the US anti-Soviet (and now ‘anti-Russian’) position, the burden of ‘guilt’ for the appalling crimes of WWII is being shifted from Germany to Russia. An attempt is being made to make the Russian people take the blame for the crimes committed by the Nazi German regime. People like Zander, Yor and Beevor are pursuing a typical Western bias against Russia and against Soviet history. This may be viewed as a form of anti-Slavic racism. [...] Considering the crimes committed by the Nazi Germans within the USSR, the defeated German citizens were treated very well. Did rapes happen? Yes – but on a very small-scale. This was considered a highly ‘immoral’ crime within the Red Army, with those responsible often being tried and executed, but the incidence was very low, certainly far lower than the rapes committed by US or British troops in Germany. [...]

Front commanders were responsible for the ideological education of the Red Army soldiers, although guidance was also often issued by the Soviet Government. The point is that leaflets and lectures were given explaining that the German working class people needed to be liberated from the bourgeois fascist Nazi regime, and that it was the Nazi elite themselves that were ultimately responsible, and not the ordinary German people. It was made clear to every Red Army soldier that it was highly expected that sections of the German population might well support the Soviets, and that everything possible must be done to facilitate this eventuality. Regardless of official communiques from the Soviet Government in Moscow – front commanders had to strictly follow the ‘internationalist’ ideology of Marxist-Leninism. What the West has to ignore when propagating the ‘mass rape’ lies about the Red Army, is the numerous reports from former German soldiers who stated clearly how well-behaved the Soviet soldiers were, particularly toward the German children. Yes – it is reported that within a number of political lectures a certain portion of the Soviet soldiers ‘questioned’ the orders to be ‘kind’, virtually all Red Army soldiers did follow these directions (with the exception of a few). This is remarkable considering the death and destruction caused in the USSR by the Hitlerite forces. [...]

What is little known today, is how German civilians fled in terror from the British and US Armies that advanced into Western Germany. Western atrocities against the German population is a subject for another topic – but the idea that Germans ‘instinctively’ headed to the Western Allies is a myth. Soviet troops treated German women (and girls) with respect and did not even visit prostitutes (an act looked down upon by the Soviet officers). German civilians often arrived in the Soviet Zone of Occupation with tales of all kinds of abuse suffered at the hands of the Western Allies. Evidence suggests that US soldiers carried ‘gang rapes’ of German girls and women – usually accompanied by much violence. The US High Command turned a blind eye to these mass rapes, and would only occasionally punish a ‘Black’ soldier – despite most US rapes perpetuated by ‘White’ Americans. [...]

What these distorters of history continuously omit is the truly horrific fate of Soviet women and the mass rape and abuse that they suffered at the hands of Nazi German troops and other Axis forces. It is the suffering of Soviet women that is being written-out of history, being replaced by the myth of the suffering of Nazi German women. This is exactly the result that Joseph Goebbels wanted and expected through his basic manipulation techniques. Black becomes white, up becomes down, and good becomes bad, etc. [...]

This all hinges on the Soviet Victory on May 9th, 1945, over the forces of Nazi German fascism. This victory by the Red Army had and continues to have immense historical impact upon world history. The Red Army brought men and women together from all over the Soviet Union and Russia, and served as a world-wide anti-fascist inspiration. The Nazi Germans tried to stop the Red Army on every level (including the use of anti-Soviet propaganda) but this rightwing effort failed. Where Goebbels has been successful is that his distorted thinking has been kept alive and developed by the US and its European Allies between 1945 and the present day. Not only did the USSR build a progressive Socialist society, but its victory over Nazi German fascism proved the superiority of its socio-economic structure even though warfare was not the primary focus of its existence. Building a peaceful world premised upon scientific development was the true purpose of the Soviet regime, but as these exposed the Western, capitalist system as being inherently inferior and of no developmental use for the working class, the enemies of Socialism must attack and destroy the true purpose of the USSR and replace it with a degenerate mirage. [...]

Canadian author named James Bacque published a book entitled ‘Other Losses’, which argued that around 1 million Germans ‘starved’ to death in relocation camps in the US Zone of Occupation. Although his work was well researched, factual and conveyed real history, the Western academic community turned on Bacque and attempted to discredit his work because it contradicted the preferred US Cold War disinformation story of the Red Army being the bad guys.

[arijackz]

PICK A CARD: What Era Is Your Beauty From?

☯︎ “A man should hear a little music, read a little poetry, and see a fine picture every day of his life, in order that worldly cares may not obliterate the sense of the beautiful which God has implanted in the human soul.” ― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Disclaimer: This is a general reading, take what resonates. I am not suggesting any of these descriptions are cannon to your ancestral history, these are just how my intuition perceived, and then presented your beauty’s energy.

p1 → p2 ↙︎ p3 → p4

🂽 Pile One 🂽 (the devil, 2oC rev., ace of cups rev., 4oW, 3oC, king of swords, the tower, the world)

❖ Pile one, I feel like I’m watching the Game of Thrones out of context. Just flashes of people from around the Medieval 1400s living their day-to-day; singing, dancing, eating together, and then… not.

❖ The imagery I got when I asked what era your beauty came from, was very longing in nature. There was a lot of joy and celebration but it felt like I was watching the film through teary eyes and a heavy heart.

❖ The “movie” flashed between a thriving culture sharing tales of triumph and having happy, drunk sing-song moments together; and then those same people under a war-torn regime of a very cruel but powerful man. I sense themes of religious persecution, nationwide government-forced famine, and general desecration of the once-peaceful way of life. The population was going through collective mourning.

❖ People lamented over their unfulfillable desire to reconnect with their homeland and all of their loved ones. With the World card at the end of the spread and the Empress at the bottom of the deck, I get the clear image that your beauty is the physical embodiment of a large collective’s longing for the sanctity of their community. You invoke that feeling people get when they remember a bitter-sweet memory that hums fervor in their chest and gives them the fire they need to push forward.

❖ Your beauty comes from an era where the genuine smile and cheer of a pretty girl sparked a nation’s hope for reformation. You are the last remaining connection to long-lost celebration and the heart of a forgotten city.

How Do You Paint The Divine Image of Hope?

🂽 Pile Two 🂽 (7oC rev., 4oP rev., full moon, leo, sacral chakra)

❖ WHOOOAAaaaaa Ammberrr is the collluuhhhhh of ya enneergyyy!! WHOoaaA, shades of gaawwllddd displayyy naturraalllyyyyyy…..

❖ Just know I was HOLLERING that. This is my hippie pile. My people. Yea that’s right, I’m talking the late 1960s - early 1970s.

❖ Your beauty arose at a time when society desperately needed color (specifically seeing some of you wearing a lot of bright colors or eye-catching jewelry or hairstyles). The world was bleak and the war’s aftermath on the overall mental and emotional welfare of the general public pushed people to radical ideals and birthed a revolution centered around liberation, pleasure, and community.

❖ Your beauty is all sunshine and rainbows. Psychedelics and organic food. The best music in human history (feel free to argue with me, but know that it is going straight out the other ear, mama) and week-long outdoor festivals full of peace, love, and vulnerability with total strangers.

❖ Your beauty brushes people with the chilling winds of shameless pleasure. The taste of unadulterated personal freedom that is almost a societal taboo. Your beauty is so purely liberating.

❖ Lmao, I imagine a guitar riff going off everytime you walk into a room.

❖ You are the physical embodiment of eccentric love and vivacious rebellion.

Play That Funky Music

🂽 Pile Three 🂽 (The lovers rev., the High Priestess rev., Ace of Swords., 4oC. 7)

❖ Revolution is a running theme for all of the piles. This collective’s beauty awakens people.

❖ I’m seeing a brilliant man going mad at the lack of creative intelligence around him and pushing for societal rebirth. A complete cultural shift from the Dark Ages (pile one), to modernity. This is my Renaissance pile.

❖ You embody the mystical fusion of art, religion, architecture, and science. You are all the world’s intrinsic beauty rolled up into one figure. You are the art that attracts painters, inventors, and philosophers alike.

❖ You have the beauty of an all-around muse. You invoke the spirit of creative passion. It is like people see you and get a stroke of inspiration. Something that kicks them in the ass and tells them to go outside and create.

❖ This pile is very romantic. A classical beauty, like red roses and bottle poems. The universal innate desire to dream big.

❖ Shoutout to my Aquarians, 11th housers, and Shatabhisha natives.

The Medieval-Modern Muse

🂽 Pile Four 🂽 (king of pentacles, 2oP, 5oP rev., 9oP)

❖ OKAY PLOTWIST?? I don’t know what era this pile’s beauty is from because it’s set in the future.

❖ It’s funny how the last piles were all set in periods of revolution (putting in the WORK) and your pile, the final pile, is set in a better world full of financial stability, the end of inequality, economic fairness, and universal abundance (the fruits of the labor).

❖ Dude, I was trying to read the message at first and was just scratching my head. I was like, “When has anywhere, literally ever been this good???” Then I saw the ace of wands reversed at the bottom of the deck and saw impending change and it clicked.

❖ I also saw some star semblance, and see that your beauty is a reminder to mankind that the “impossible” is already set in motion. The hell we have created will crumble.

❖ You are a physical embodiment of society’s future triumph. You radiate wealth and fairness. My Venusians, especially Libra. You also look regal, something about you makes people want to stand taller.

❖ You got the pride card, I see that you give people the feeling of victory. You are living proof of future triumph in a better world where greed and sorrow are eradicated.

❖ You are the harbinger of the next era.

Introducing The First Titanium Man On The Moon!

[ovaryacted]

Y'all know how I get down politically, but I just wanted to say truly, now is the time to be the most vigilant when it comes to the media & how people talk about Iran in particular, specifically of the upcoming retaliatory response.

Now that President Trump chose to strike three nuclear bases in the soverign nation of Iran at night, at random, without congressional approval during a complete internet blackout in the country, that sets the groundwork for Iran's retalliation & that will bring the United States into war. Likewise, you will see A LOT of media sources trying to manufacture consent to make you all believe that we should be going to war with Iran in order to "liberate" them from their suppressive regime and to spread democracy in the region. Please know, we as a nation have absolutely no business getting involved into another war in the Middle East when it was the zionist colonial project of Israel that sent that first strike, and Iran was well within their right to defend themselves against the unjust strikes from Israel, and now the United States.

The "threat" of Iran possessing nuclear weapons has been mentioned for decades, and they have never come close to manufacturing one because of very strict sanctions & rules on how Iran can possess & use uranium. The biggest argument of why they shouldn't have nukes in the first place is because they will serve as a deterrent to Israel, who already possess nukes (badly kept secret). Globally, there are 9 countries that have nuclear weapons: Russia, United States, China, France, United Kingdom, Pakistan, India, Israel, and North Korea. Several others host nukes, but don't have the capabilities to make them. Iran doesn't fall in either category, however they've been able to utilize more of their uranium in the past few years because Trump pulled out of the Iran Nuclear Deal that Obama signed in 2015 during his first presidential term.

Having a country like Iran possess nukes, that is close to other neighboring countries and has openly and vehemently vocalized it's disgust with the zionist entity that is Israel in how they're able to bomb 5 countries simultaneously while committing a brutal genocide against the Palestinan people for the past 2 years (really 80 years), would pose a threat to the colonial project itself. It would make sense why Israel or the U.S. doesn't want Iran to have nukes if it threatens their ability to control and infiltrate the Middle East whenever they want, right?

But you will hear headlines and people in the media all throughout news channels and newspaper articles that had Israel & the U.S. not struck Iran when they did, we would be closer to nuclear annihilation and they Iran now can't build a nuclear weapon. That is a pure lie, and not to mention, that is how the media will try to sway public opinion in making you believe we had to go to war with Iran to stop them, we just had to get involved in the conflict because Iran was brutally killing civilians, raping their women, and they will attack us in the imperial core with weapons of mass destruction so we must stop them!

Sounds familiar right?

The current administration, whether it's just Trump or the entire godamn thing, is following the same framework President George Bush laid out to send the United States on a fictional witch hunt to track down these "weapons of mass destruction" they didn't want hitting American soil following the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. spent decades and trillions of dollars invading Afghanistan (2001-2021), Iraq (2003-2011), all while getting involved with Yemen & Syria to this day. They did all of that, sent people to die senselessly for these weapons that did not exist, all for a military conflict that in the end failed and resulted in a complete dismantling of several countries in the region. Not to mention the residual impacts of war that often go dismissed: disregard for our troops, disease spreading, famine & food insecurity, human trafficking, climate change from warfare, overall destruction of entire communities, infrastructure, & social systems. War isn't good for anybody.

The belief that Iran is a threat to the United States and to the world is based on so many things, mainly racism, orientalist ideals & islamophobia, and you will see the same language that was used post-9/11 to demonize Muslims & Arab people now being used to justify our continuous involvement within the region. America is the great bringer of democracy and peace all around the world. Israel was just protecting itself and its people from being invaded and killed. I beg and I pray that you all don't fall for the same lies that have been spread for decades to bring us into unnecessary wars and conflicts for the sake of funding our military industrial complex. Because nothing brings politicians and billionaires closer together than profiting off of the deaths of black and brown bodies, whether that be overseas or back at home. Colonial imperialistic projects need frequent expansion and investment, so war, in combination with late-stage capitalism and a sign of huge fascistic military force, presence, and aggression, is how that is done, and Israel & the U.S. are doing such things in the Middle East. We as people shouldn’t be sent to war to fund & defend an occupational entity’s right to wipe an entire group of people off of the face of the Earth and expand into other countries.

We don't know what's going to happen, everything is up in the air and the next 48 hours are crucial, but one thing is certain. We live in a world where we have erratic people in power who are blood thirsty and have a craving for death on a large scale, regardless of the consequences, the cost, and whos involved. Do your research, stay away from mainstream media sources like CNN and the NYT that are acting like propaganda machines for the American military industrial complex, read a book on the histories of these countries before jumping to conclusions, defend and protect your Muslim & Arab neighbors, because it's only going to get worse from here, and we aren't prepared for how bad.

We have our rights being stripped away one by one, increased mass policing towards immigrants with ICE, cost of living is through the roof, cuts to Medicare and Medicaid are being passed & healthcare is practically unattainable, social safety nets are being wiped out, political assassinations are being swept under the rug, AI Corporate heads are being promoted to the highest branches of the military...and now we have war. They don't care if it's illegal, they don't care if it's unconstitutional, they only care that we die for the empire's benefit.

Iran is not the "bully" of the Middle East, just like Iraq wasn't, neither was Afghanistan, Yemen, or Syria. It will always be the United States and it's dog without a leash, Israel. You can have your critiques about the Iranian regime, but their liberation is not coming from Israel or the U.S. bombing them. You can't liberate the violated women & children of Iran when you're dropping bombs over their heads. And from the bottom of my heart, fuck anybody who voted for this man, you voted for this, you asked for this.

[rosykims]

i genuinely love love love the iconoclast path in rogue trader SO MUCH. its one of the things that ultimately enamors me to the warhammer franchise as a whole despite empathy being so antithetical to its world and genre. its not just because iconoclast is the Nice Person route or because it subverts the foundational principle that In The Grim Dark Universe There Is Only War............ but mostly i love it because its the best way to actually engage w the morality system presented in 40k and explore it the way it deserves to be explored. its so unique parsing through the choices of the game and navigating how one might actually ACHIEVE goodness through - or more accurately without - the lens of liberal modern morality. because adhering to what we presently would call morality is arguably crueler than some of the dogmatic choices - or at least the game wants you to reflect on that and decide if that kind of morality still has value or not. and i like that they give you the opportunity to do that. youre rarely rewarded for kindness in this game and in fact your oftentimes actively punished for it (void shadows was a TRIAL for my iconoclast rt) which presents another question: are you being good because of a reward you believe you'lll be entitled to, or are you being good for the sake of goodness itself??? in saying that i do LOVE how there IS payoff in the iconoclast route eventually - when youve bleed and suffered for it enough. but theres a quality to it thats so..... so BITTERSWEET, because yippee you Empathed your way to the top - but also what IS the top?? congratulations, you are the kindest autocrat in the most bloodthirsty fascist regime in human history, sitting on your throne on a voidship run by all your slaves and serfs who die by the hundreds every time you make a warpjump for some dumbass sidequest. what the fuck. can you actually call that goodness ????? is whatever goodness-adjacent thing youve achieved worth it even if you cant change the system in the ways that matter ??? lastly - the iconoclast ending is both so wildly universe-altering to the point of feeling like a heretical ending - but also kind of. not mattering really lol. because even though its hopeful, the "good" ending still feels soooo tentative with the likelihood that its very likely not going to last. but that in itself is my favorite take away from playing this game as The Last Good Guy in the Galaxy: because the love DIDNT change anything. and it DOESNT save anyone. but ohhhhhhhhh my fucking god does it absolutely matter that it was there.

[psychotrenny]

Like I really do wish people remembered more about the Anti-Imperial struggles of Southern Africa in the late 20th century. As incomplete as their revolutions may have been, with the politically free nations succumbing to the overwhelming force of Western Imperialism and being taken over by neo-colonial comprador regimes, what they did manage to achieve was still so very impressive. A struggle for human dignity against the most openly cruel and brutish forms of colonialism, the mobilisation and education of the most impoverished and super-exploited people on the planet in the name of not only liberating their own people but with the understanding that they were advancing the interests of humanity as a whole. Nationalist in character and internationalist in spirit, seeking to build independent nations that could co-operate in solidarity with all the progressive minded peoples of the world. Introducing healthcare, education and fair exchange into the forgotten and exploited parts of their country, giving a purpose to millions who enthusiastically gave their lives to defend and advance their gains both material and psychological.

The MPLA in Angola, FRELIMO in Mozambique, the alliance of ZANU and ZAPU in Zimbabwe, SWAPO in Namibia and the ANC of South Africa. It's also worth remembering the PAIGC of Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde who, despite their geographical separation, faced a common enemy and so forged deep bonds with their comrades to the south. Whatever their eventual fates after independence, triumphs and failures alike, the struggles they fought against the reactionary White Supremacist regimes of Portugal, Rhodesia and South Africa were nothing short of heroic. Despite vast differences in space and time, I think these struggles hold both inspiration and lessons for progressives peoples all over the world to this day. It's truly a great shame how much they've been forgotten, these conflicts only ever brought up as a footnote to something more well known rather than as an area of interest in their own right.

If you're curious, the Africa section of the Marxist Internet Archive has a lot of good material from the period that's a good place to start learning more, even if it is rather lacking in information from the latter portion of the struggle. ARG's Race to Power gives a good overview of the general situation in Southern Africa as of 1971, while LSM has some good general collection of material collected from Angola, Mozambique and Guinea-Bissau. The entire LSM "Life Histories from Revolution" series provides some really interesting first hand ground-level accounts of the conditions of life under Imperialism and the movements that formed to oppose it, while their Interviews with Liberation Movement Leaders provides the views of people higher up in the revolutionary movements. I'd recommend checking them out to at least broadly familiarise yourself with these tragically neglected struggles.

[taliabhattwrites]

I’m sorry if you’ve answered this, or if it should be obvious, but you does your substack say trans/rad/fem? What is trans radical feminism? How does it differ from just radical feminism?

Yep! It says Trans/Rad/Fem, as does the title of my book.

The short version is that your average online hate speech aficionado who calls themselves a TE"RF" is no more well-versed in actual radical feminist literature than the billionaire writer. The most feminist literature they've read is likely wizard kidlit, and maybe the most hateful bits of 'Transsexual Empire' or a bit of Sheila Jeffreys if you're lucky.

Meanwhile, the radical feminist tradition was one that itself emerged as a materialist, inclusive, and more working-class counterpoint to the First Wave's doddering Friedanism. People don't recall much of the first wave, but it engendered such ironclad feminist arguments as "lesbians are not oppressed by patriarchy because they do not marry and are not confined to the domestic sphere", or "mothers and fathers are equally responsible for women doing to the bulk of childcare, because mothers are so reluctant to let go."

Truly, it's a miracle there were any subsequent waves at all.

Adrienne Rich's essay on Compulsory Heterosexuality can be viewed as something of a turning point, a collation of a more materialist framework (since I don't believe Rich necessarily originated all the points she raised). She, rather gently and with more patience than I have ever demonstrated, addressed the arguments of the heterosexual feminists and highlighted the coercive nature of patriarchy and of heterosexuality itself, which could be considered a social regime, a model that attempts to subsume all women into domestic servitude and sexual labor for men.

(A quick aside--if you've ever encountered any arguments on this site along the lines of "CompHet is only for lesbians", do note that the original text involves Rich, a lesbian, laying out the argument to hetfeminists that all women, even straight women, are subjected to a mandatory heterosexual existence, and are punished for trying to live outside of it, as by pursuing economic independence or choosing to be childless.)

For me personally, given the rather dismal state of Indian feminism, which is dominated by affluent liberals and ignores the more radical prolefem and dalit feminist elements attempting to come to the fore, it was refreshing to finally behold a piece of feminist literature that identifies and names forced marriage as an aspect of patriarchy, one that a significant chunk of women all over the world, both within Western territories and without, live with. So much mainstream feminism in the 2000s and beyond was located in the interpersonal, the foregrounding of choices women "should" make, ignoring that for the vast majority of us, patriarchy either denies us any choice at all, or presents us with false ones, harshly punishing us for some choices while presenting them as "free".

(Liberal ideologies and systems, bound up as they are in a veneration of contracts between equal parties, account very poorly for contracts between parties on unequal footing, where one is at a significant material disadvantage and cannot truly make a "free" choice.)

Besides, it is neither true that modern feminism entirely discarded the second wave--look at "gender is a social construct" and "heteronormativity" for now-banal feminist concepts steeped in radfem origins--nor is it true that the "third wave", such as it was, was entirely aa step forward in inclusivity, trans-acceptance, class consciousness, or even racial justice. One need only look at the state of modern feminist discourses to see how well the latest "waves" have managed to argue the case for trans liberation, and my current most well-known essay is a deep dive into the Orientalist, transmisogynistic origins of "third genders", an idea the queer academy has uncritically absorbed and even championed.

I am under no misapprehensions that second-wave feminists would be my pals. A lot of them were white, for one thing. It is, however, a tradition that is both more diverse than the prevailing image of white, middle-class lesbian academics would have you believe, and one that has more than a few useful things to say, especially to a transfeminist.

I don't think we are best served by erecting a cordon sanitaire around the second wave and refusing to engage with it critically. I've read Transsexual Empire, for fuck's sake, and doing so revealed to me just how paper-thin this reactionary movement has always been. That book is as farcical and easily disproved as Hilary Cass' recent bilious screed, but both were elevated to legislative and political relevancy not due to their veracity, but because institutions simply need any literature to provide a veneer of legitimacy to their transphobia. That the texts exist at all is enough.

I have, in short, made my life's work engaging with scholarship that has historically ignored us, vilified us, or instrumentalized us, and that is as true for second-wave feminists as it is for cultural anthropologists. I just believe that Monique Wittig and Adrienne Rich made valuable contributions to feminist thought, and even as we remember all that their missteps, we should not erase what they did right.

On a personal note, I can think of no better revenge than taking the abandoned threads of the radical feminist tradition and finally fulfilling its aborted potential, as a transfeminist. The trans question tore the movement apart because of a subset of zealots who couldn't and wouldn't see us as sisters in the feminist struggle.

I am going to finish what they started, and make the conclusions that they couldn't. We're good at cleaning up other people's messes, after all.

[l-in-the-light]

"I'm sure he's got nothing to do with me!" says Luffy and I was waiting for him to say it. For him to hear all of this Nika lore and declare that, nope, I don't care, I'm not Nika, I'm not a liberator. It's just such a Luffy thing to do. But I know many fans actually will be shocked with Luffy's answer here or will just dismiss it. I have seen many opinions before that Luffy was always a liberator by choice, so becoming Nika is just natural course of events for him and he will have no problem embracing his role in the bigger scheme of things. Some even complained they hate that Luffy is Nika because they don't want Luffy to be the "fated hero" but instead a "from nobody to the king of the world" trope. But nope! Luffy just noped all of this himself.

Luffy is not a liberator and he's not an altruistic hero, he doesn't go from island to island aiming to save people, and if you think he wanted to, then please remember Fishmen Island and how unhappy he was with the idea of being a hero:

And now if you think Luffy changed since then because Dressrosa happened, then please remember what he asked of Momonosuke in Wano:

Yep, that's right. Luffy still *doesn't have any interest* in becoming a hero. If you think he's alright with that and changed his mind, then you're just not paying attention to him, sorry to say that. Luffy has been pretty consistent about this too and now he declared it yet again in Elbaf. It's the third time already.

You just think it's not a big deal because he so easily changed his mind in Fishmen Island, but it happened only because he had an actual reason to do that. Jimbei promised Luffy all the meat he wants. He gave him a *personal reason* to act like a hero, which is why Luffy agreed. And he did the same in Dressrosa. He wouldn't liberate that country if he didn't get attached first to Law and Rebecca (yes, in this order), and his crew to tontattas. They always do it for someone particular, for their friends. It's the same in Wano too, Luffy's constant motivation is Tama, Momo and Kinemon. He wants them to be happy, most of all, and he even says as much when he defeats Kaido: "I want a world where all of my friends can eat as much as they like".

There, he doesn't do it altruistically because he hates oppresion and villains who thrive on pain of common people and he can't stand seeing it. Yes, he probably thinks it's unfair, but he also grew up in Goa Kingdom, the very definition of unfair regime. He saves oppressed people only when they are his friends or has some other personal interest involved. He defeats the Marine base in Shells Town for Koby (and Zoro, later). He defeats Don Krieg so he can repay his food debt to Baratie. He defeats Arlong for Nami. He fights Wapol for Chopper (who saved Nami) and who he already considers his friend because of that. He fights for the Giants (Little Garden) and Vivi (Alabasta), Conis (Skypiea), Robin (Water 7 and Enies Lobby), Brook (Thriller Bark), Hachi (Sabaody) etc. Though, he does make friends rather easily, so usually it's not that big of a deal. But he isn't going out of his way to places he reads about in the newspapers that need to be liberated, he instead cares more for his own dream. He doesn't enter a certain island with the idea in mind that goes like "if I see some injustice here, I'm gonna bring this shit down". It's the other way around. He makes friends and realizes they're unhappy.

He wants them to be happy again and to live without regrets, and that's why he brings the shit down, whatever it is that makes people he cares about feel so unhappy. Because he thinks this is at least something he can do for his friends. Luffy doesn't think he can do a lot of things, he can't do much at all, but he can do one thing: beat up a guy when needed.

He knows how regret feels like ever since he believed Sabo died, he's not gonna sit there and do nothing next time something like this happens. That's why it's so important for him, to make sure his friends are happy. And that's why he beats up people and liberates countries. It's not for justice, he simply wants his friends to be happy.

But wait a moment, Luffy also wants freedom. Yes, he does. He wants to be the King of the Pirates, because for him it means to be free. And that's how he actually speaks about Nika as well:

He wants the freedom for himself. Isn't it funny that he thinks he already achieved it though?

And before you're disgusted by how selfish Luffy actually is, hear me out: Luffy is simply not a martyr. He won't die or sacrfice himself for the world to liberate it. He will instead die for the world if he thinks that will make his friends happy. Preferably though, he would want to survive and eat that meat with them, and be happy together.

Still, if you want him to be a liberator of a whole world it is actually possible, you just need to make it personal for Luffy, like I suggested. For example, put a person or multpile people who want to save/destroy the world (whichever option you fancy) on Luffy's crew. Luffy always cares for dreams of his crewmates and will always support them (because fullfilling their dreams will make them happy), so he would become a liberator if that helps them. But he would do it for them, not for the world.

Luffy is not a hero because he has a golden heart and a strong sense of justice. He's a hero when his friends are in danger instead, because instead of a golden heart, he simply has a big heart and makes friends wherever he goes. A martyr-like hero who sacrfices himself for people without caring for his own wellbeing is noble, but it's also not a healthy mentality, believe it or not. For starters, if you never care enough for yourself and are ready to throw your life away for a concept, what will happen with people who love you and care for you? Is it fair towards them to throw your life away without caring who you're leaving behind and how they will feel about it? Do you even care then for their feelings if your pursuit of greater good is more important to you? You can save the world and make people you love sad and unhappy, and like they don't even care anymore to live, because you were the one who made them happy and now you're gone. Did you save the world for them or destroyed it for them instead, as the result?

Luffy has his own interest in saving his friends too: so he's not alone again. Humans aren't selfless beings, but it doesn't automatically make us bad people either. And sometimes, while pursuing selfish things, we do something that appear to be extremely selfless. But at the bottom of it: we also do it for themselves, even if it kills us.

Tokyo Babylon taught me that every act is selfish, even if it appears like we do it for someone else: we simply want to feel better about ourselves then. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as we don't lose the sight of other people's feelings on our way. We can always share, after all, and that sharing is the bridge between the lone islands that people are.

Luffy, if he dies, will also say, just like Seishiro: "I didn't do it for you. I did everything by my own choice". For myself. Despite the fact it is also true he does it to make his friends happy. Being selfish and being selfless is like two sides of the same coin and both choices can end up actually hurting people. In the first case, because you care too much about yourself and too little about feelings of others, and in second case because you care too little about yourself and still too little about feelings of people that love and care for you. Can you spot the thing in common here?

[tothisemptiness]

Ramblings on the posters

The quote on the left is often falsely attributed to Martin Luther or Martin Luther King, and in the original quote the blank space is "apple". The quote means that "even if you are not going to reap the benefits of an action you must still do it because it is the right thing to do". It is quite fitting for ATEEZ, who liberated World Z of Z's oppressive regime even though it was not their own world and couldn't enjoy the result because they were immediately sent back to World A.

The quote on the right is from William Tell. He was a rebel against a tyrannical local leader in Switzerland. When he went against the tyrant, he was forced to shoot an apple on top of his son's head with an arrow to regain his freedom. He succeeds but since he reveals his intention to kill the tyrant he is still captured. While he was being taken to the dungeon with a boat a storm breaks out. Fearing the boat would sink, the soldiers free Tell to save the situation, but he sails into rocks and escapes.

Both quotes are attributed to revolutionary figures, which may mean we are going back to our World Z storyline.

The blue poster has a lot to unpack. Starting with the burning, torn down buildings, they remind me so much of Halazia.

This isn't the only Halazia connection. In the poster, among the clouds on the top there is a shining ball in the sky. The last time we saw such a thing was in Halazia.

Moving on, we see the guy (probably Yeosang) plant a tree. The tree is planted on red soil, like it was watered with blood for its first water. Visually, we see trees a lot in ATEEZ's videos, like the burning tree in Fireworks and the trees in Crazy Form promotions (one alive and one charred).

In the canon, however, there is one very relevant tree, which is the Sibling Tree, two trees planted for the brothers that died at the Disposal Center merged into one and i think showing the tree planted on their blood is a very interesting image. The tree is important to Yeosang, since at the brothers' funeral, when the tree is planted, he swears their deaths will not be in vain. The tree is in Thunder's headquarters, which is now used as the interim government of the Liberation Zone, where people who don't want to have their emotions artificially controlled live.

In the sky, we see white doves (which are one of the symbols surrounding Yeosang) flying away. This is usually a symbol for broken peace. Putting all these together I have a theory that at one point, when ATEEZ were no longer there, the Liberation Zone and the Control Zone, who decided to coexist through an agreement, broke the peace and started a war. This then lead to the situation we see in Halazia with the city seen in the MV being the Liberation Zone and the people who first waited for Halateez and then turned against them when they didn't come back being the Liberated people.

There is one more detail in this poster which could mean nothing but bothers me a lot, which is the broken waterjar at the bottom. I tried searching for what that symbol could mean and came across this poem:

I am limited with my shallow understanding of symbolist poems and the Mexican history but the poem seems to present themes of exploitative rulers, dreaming of a better world, returning to the origin, and the effects of mankind's greed, war and misery on the earth. Most of these overlap with ATEEZ's themes. Furthermore, we can see some symbols like blue sun, dreamers, waves, answers, and birds that pop up in ATEEZ's art also in this poem. If I am right and this is a relevant thing, then it can reinforce the themes ATEEZ will explore in Golden Hour Part.3 and onwards.

About the second poster, there are 8 people on it. The seven's eyes are blurred and one is aiming with a crossbow. This can mean two things:

a) The people are brainwashed by the government and now target the revolutionaries.

b) As also seen in William Tell, the revolutionaries are forced to risk one of their own.

I like the second a bit more. And in ATEEZ we have a member who is closely associated with apples, planting and trees (credit to @/jonghopedia on twitter for the images below)

Which raises the idea: What if the group will have to risk Jongho in one of their revolutionary acts? This would also give some meaning to the Jongho holding apples image in the Birthday MV which we couldn't find a non-meta explanation for.

If this part follows the William Tell story then maybe the boat part can be recreated in ATEEZ's story as well, which would be fitting since they are pirates.

[franollie]

14 Characteristics of Fascism by Lawrence Britt

Powerful and Continuing Nationalism Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

Supremacy of the Military Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

Rampant Sexism The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

Controlled Mass Media Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

Obsession with National Security Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

Religion and Government are Intertwined Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

Corporate Power is Protected The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

Labor Power is Suppressed Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

Obsession with Crime and Punishment Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

Rampant Cronyism and Corruption Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

Fraudulent Elections Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

[mageofminge]

REMINDER TO BOYCOTT EUROVISION

Here's a quick run down of everything they've done + why you should boycott

Despite banning Russia for its actions in the Russia-Ukraine war, Israel is still in the contest (despite committing war crimes, attacking Gaza with genocidal intent etc)

"But Hamas attacked first on Oct.7" - Then why is Israel also bombing southern Lebanon if Hezbollah and the Lebanese government aren't involved?????

Israel often uses ESC as a platform for propaganda

One key example is their promotions for their 2019 broadcast, where they tried to turn attention away from the occupation and portray the country as a liberal haven of democracy, with the lines "... it's a land of war and occupation. But we have so much more than that!" and pointing out its the only place in the middle east where "gays are hugging in the street". (as if the rest of the Levant INCLUDING PALESTINE isn't actually relatively chill when it comes to gay rights)

Another example is them sending an Ethiopian Jewish singer to perform a song called "Set me Free" the same year they stormed Al-Aqsa during Ramadan, which seemed to be very intentionally trying to shift the narrative away from Israel as a colonial occupier, and more as a persecuted people who have finally found safety

As well as the issues with Israel as a competitor, ESC is SPONSORED by MoroccanOil, an Israeli company (ik the name is misleading, but speaking as a Moroccan Israel just really loves to steal our culture while treating our people they stole like shit [I could go on an entire rant ab this but I won't])

So what this means is we can't just boycott this year and then forget about it the next. Until Israeli presence is completely removed from EUROVISION, your views and your money will be funnelled to support an Apartheid regime. I already know people who are still watching Eurovision despite not supporting the occupation, because they love the artists and the spectacle. But no spectacle is worth supporting an Apartheid regime. The best way we can help the Palestinians is by making Israel a pariah state, and pressuring politicians to cut all their funding. That way they won't be able to put down uprisings and maintain the brutal police state they have - at which point they can only resolve the conflict peacefully and end occupation, or find themselves in the throw of a violent revolution. It was these strategies that ultimately helped end the apartheid regime in South Africa, and it is these strategies which can help end Israeli apartheid.

[sometimesoliloquy]

all of our time chasing America, but she never had a home for me

In season 2, desperate with worry over June's mental health, Nick says to Serena "She doesn't have anyone to look out for her." Serena rightly points out "It appears that she does". Through the years, through thick and thin, even when she was back with Luke and Nick remarried to Rose, he was always there looking out for her. But in the end it appears it was Nick who never had anyone to look out for him.

Nick—as a young man, essentially abandoned by his family, failed by his society and his country. Left without a safety net by the greed and corruption of a capitalist oligarchy masquerading as an equitable democracy. And finally, he ends up failed and abandoned by his own love, the very love that held so much potential to save him as it had saved her. The woman he did and would do anything for but who ultimately refused to fight for him when the raw face of his flawed humanity held up too painful a mirror to her own.

London Grammar’s beautiful song “America” has always made me think of Nick ever since I first heard it four years ago, but now, in the aftermath of season 6 and the series ending, it hits harder (and more tragically) than ever. Interestingly, the artist’s intended meaning behind the lyrics was a more symbolic one, using “the American dream” as a metaphor for her own personal journey of letting go.

But relating to the character of Nick, I think it also works very nicely as a more literal interpretation of how the America in the (semi)fictional world of The Handmaid’s Tale (and June, herself, in representing a much more privileged and complacent sector of that society) let him and so many others like him down—and how our real world America indeed continues to do the same.

How the “American Dream” has essentially become a cruel mirage for too large a swathe of the population, left to flounder and fight for meager scraps, all the while disdained by folks looking down from up on high scoffing “pull yourself up by your bootstraps!”, who themselves have never struggled to literally afford a pair of boots for them or their children.

I get that the writers and show runners wanted to hit a political message with their ending. What I’ll never understand though is the message they ultimately chose to send—one reeking of elitism, classism and non-intersectional white feminism—when they had such an important and poignant opportunity staring them right in the face, one that is both (unfortunately) timely and timeless.

The show really had a chance to highlight the socio-economic oppression that results from corrupt capitalist societies and exacerbates harmful societal division. Which, combined with self-absorbed, self righteous complacency from the upper and middle classes (often even in the most “liberal” and “progressive” populations), makes the rise of totalitarian regimes possible, with those would-be groups looking to grab power (exactly like the fictional Sons of Jacob) thriving on the confusion and division, the “othering” of certain groups, and preying on the most lost and vulnerable in society, those who are disillusioned and desperate, failed by their government and tossed aside by their fellow citizens who view themselves as more “deserving”.

Instead those in charge of THT seem to have doubled down on the idea that certain groups of people are in fact less deserving, in the end providing forgiveness and redemptive arcs for two major architects and founders of Gilead, a baby thieving rapist, and a cattle-prod-happy torturer of women. But not for the disadvantaged young man who got conned into a violent cult parading as a faith-based charity organization for a job and ended up a reluctant citizen of a totalitarian regime with a small amount of power.

They could have presented a message that sometimes good people do bad things out of ignorance and/or desperation, but are still worthy of being saved. That if they have a good heart and want do the right thing, all they might need is someone to say "I see you, I understand." To reach out a hand to help pull them out of the darkness. Instead they gave the character with a tragic backstory an even more tragic ending, with ultimately no one who would fight for him. It's not a very hopeful message if you ask me.

(Sooo this was part of a much much longer review I was writing on my phone in gmail drafts which gmail then decided to delete so fuck me, I guess😅😅😭 Anyway, this is all that was left and I don't have the energy to reconstruct it all, at least definitely not rn, so I guess I'll just leave this excerpt here.)

[pumpacti0n]

We should always be aware that it isn't some innocent mistake that authoritarian "leftists" have constantly failed to acknowledge systems of power other than a vulgar "anti-capitalism" or "anti-imperialism", like they've carelessly left out an ingredient in a cake recipe.

"Whoops, we've acknowledged one abusive hierarchy, but the other ones slipped through our fingers, silly us!" Nope. The reason this analysis of power isn't included in their ideology and praxis is because they consider these hierarchies useful to their projects.

This is why they'll mock or ignore discourse related to youth liberation, disability justice, gender self-determination or anti-patriarchal struggle, for example, or engage in apologetics for capitalist regimes in other countries -- they want to "have their cake, and eat it too".

A key reason why "the left", as some might call it, is not as powerful as it could be isn't because of some lack of discipline (or "degeneracy"), but rather a lack of intersectionality, a criticism that many of those within the black radical tradition, (black feminists and transfeminists more specifically,) have been highlighting in one way or another for at least 50 years.

Authoritarian "leftists" don't want to sacrifice the power that these hierarchies afford them, which explains why they're largely not opposed to prisons, borders, police, the enforcement of gender roles and even capitalism itself, if it's under the purview of the "socialist" ("workers") state and its bureaucrats.

And this is why I keep putting "leftist" in quotes...We're not free until we're all free, so the implication that we should settle for addressing one or two systems of domination while allowing all the others to flourish until we address them in some vague point in the far future is a distortion of what truly radical liberatory politics should entail.

It's simply a myth that we can address capitalism while leaving racism, ableism and misogyny etc. intact, as if they aren't mutually reinforced by one another, as if fascists and reactionaries will forget that they exist once capital is abolished. This is a fantasy, a delusion.

Authcoms love to pose questions like "without a state to enforce class rule, how will the proletariat defend itself?" but a better question would be: "if we fail to acknowledge the hierarchies that atomize and disempower the masses, how could we ever be a threat to capitalists in the first place? how would abandoning the most vulnerable populations serve the interests of the "working class" and "anti-imperial" struggle?

For example, (cis) women make up approximately 50% of the world's population -- so if women are still subjugated by patriarchal rule and the gendered division of labor, how will we have the numbers to fight?

Similarly, a significant portion of the world's population are currently incarcerated. If we don't abolish prisons, allowing the State to continue extracting labor from prisoners and destabilizing untold millions of social relations in the process, how can we hope to match or exceed their powers?

If we do not challenge the capitalist, productivist logic of endless resource accumulation, with its constant pollution of the environment and the displacement and erasure of indigenous peoples and non-human animals, there will be no habitable planet left for us during this "revolution", because we will have destroyed all of it in the name of profit...so what would be the point?

These aren't minor concerns that we can put off indefinitely, and it isn't some innocent mistake that they are left out of the discourse, but are instead deliberate attempts to co-opt liberation struggle for the sake of advancing counter-revolution and authoritarian projects.

It's no wonder then, that they are eager to dismiss any criticism of their projects the result of "western propaganda", as if these same critiques aren't leveraged by very people belonging to populations they constantly tokenize whenever it suits their agenda.

They'd much rather treat every marginalized community as some monolith or as primitive victims in need of saving and representation by a vanguard. This chauvinist, colonial, assimilationist, antisocial attitude is endemic in (often white,) authoritarian circles, because it forms the basis of their position towards racial and gender hierarchies, that they are a natural and inevitable factor of organization itself. They are wrong.

In this sense, they aren't meaningfully different from the capitalists they pretend to hate so much. In truth, they are just jealous and greedy for more cake.