#group thesis era especially…….

[tinartss]

“Ordinary people and geniuses would be separated by various practical realities, and they did not have to force themselves to fit into a group they did not belong to.”

[roxannepolice]

Rant 3/phantom pains of Schrödinger's lore in ChibnallWho/"the history between" doesn't mean much to the author. that is, it does. but it doesn't. but it does. but not really. but./can someone in the group chat please read my time sensitive questions I posted 25 hours ago?

Between bracing myself to finally open the advisors reviewed thesis, waiting for anyone at work to give a newbie a hint, and reading a fairly good criticism of the political stance in ChibnallWho, I guess it's a good time to let go off some steam about this era. Now, an important clarification for tumblr: when I criticize the show, I am not in any way bashing on people who enjoy it! Good for you, and that's why I try to tag these appropriately.

But yeah, this is going to go deep into what I mean when I say the writing in this era is just bad, something even its defenders sometimes concede. This often turns into dicussions of political/social messaging in seasons 11-13, which is as fair criticism as any. Yes, it often veered into confusing to downright appalling. But for me, that's not what "bad writing" means. You can make an excellent story about a likeable rapist and murderer. You can make compelling propaganda of pretty much any economic stance (well, maybe except for "the solution to problems with Amazon is to blow up their trucks so now everything has to be delivered on foot I guess", that's something straight from Monty Python). And of course, the "too woke" "criticisms" aren't anything valid like at all.

No, for me the bad writing in ChibnallWho lies in the general sense of confusion as to who exactly is the target audience here: someone who's very well acquaintanced with the lore(s), or someone who's completely new to the show. Now, this is also inspired by some criticisms of RTD2 is that it is too expository, leading into the show-within-a-show theorizing. And of course, exposition can be done well or not-so-well, and there's good argument some parts of exposition in s14 were on the nose. But the thing about a television series, especially one as long as Doctor Who, is that any episode can be someone's first - and the writer's job is to make it so it won't be their last. What this means is that the audience needs to be provided the information necessary to grasp at least the emotional level of the story, if not every bit of earlier lore logic. In the case of Doctor Who there's also a part of establishing which part of the lore is valid to the story at hand, considering that both within the show itself, but also the huge multimedia lore, there are bound to be contradictions. And that's ok! You have a good story idea that will require a retcon for a better pay off, go for it! Like, if you really think the Doctor should get to save Gallifrey for their 50th birthday, then go ahead, just reduce the Time War to a local conflict between Time Lords and Daleks instead of underlining just how widespread across time and space it was, and logistically impossible to contain by removing one party (this is one of the many cases of "I don't like what Moffat did, but I agree the execution is functional").

Basically, Lancelot having an affair with Guinevre isn't relevant to him storming a wedding and killing mortally wounding giving a fleshwound to the bride's father.

So, essentially my issue with ChibnallWho writing is simultaneously trying to cut itself off from lore/earlier seasons, while relying on it for any emotional pay off. To give a counterexample from this very era's one of best written episodes: when the Doctor goes on about what being turned into a Cyberman means and that she won't lose anyone else to that, that's bloody powerful! And it's powerful regardless of whether you know it's specifically about Bill, or just go on the information provided within the episode - that the Doctor lost someone to this. Unfortunately, The Haunting of Villa Diodati is an honourable exception in this and many other aspects.

So, to start from the beginning. There's a frequent criticism that team TARDIS was overcrowded in seasons 11 and 12 with three companions, to which an immediate defense is that it's not the first time there were three companions at once. Fine. But combine this with the following: it's not just three companions introduced at once, it's three companions introduced at once, plus a brand new Doctor, plus a brand new sonic, plus a brand new TARDIS interior (that's absent for nearly full two first episodes). So you're basically left with four strangers and no point of reference in your getting to know them. And by no point of reference, I mean something that I haven't noticed anyone else pointing out: Thirteen is literally the first Doctor since One to have no established elements in their first season, at all (barring the TARDIS and sonic, again, completely redesigned).

It's a bit hard to discuss One to Two regeneration relying only on stills and audio, but Polly and Ben are there to act as audience proxies for this Beatle-hairstyled guy with a recorder being the old man he was a moment ago. Three's first season all revolves around UNIT, established in Two's era. Four inherits UNIT and Sarah Jane. Five inherits Adric, Nyssa, Tegan and the Master for his welcome. Six has Peri. Seven has Mel, the Master and the Rani. Eight's movie is all about the Master. Even the reboot for Nine has the Nastene consciousness as a hello and the whole season revolving around the Daleks. Ten gets Rose and Tylers, and Cybermen, and Daleks, and Sarah Jane, and K-9. Eleven gets the previously established River Song and a Classic Who villain reunion in the season finale. Twelve gets Clara. Thirteen gets.... Twelve's suit that she should have stayed in and Daleks, nearly three months from her first episode.

And the thing is, I understand how this would have appeared to be a good idea on paper! Complaints about the show getting lost up it's own self-referential ass have been around for years by this point, and even Moffat tried to go for a soft reboot in s10. Chibs literally asking him to set the TARDIS on fire is as symbolic a new beginning as they get. A bold, intriguing idea. As is trying to explore Titanic with nothing but a snorkel.

Because in practice it had two fundamental flaws, one more general and one specific to the story as it unfolded. The general one has been hinted at: this is basically why there's the sense of overcrowding on the TARDIS, while also leaving the audience feeling they don't really know anyone on board. Are we getting to know the new Doctor from the companions' perspective? The companions from the Doctor's? The new villain (and a really unfamiliar one, Toothboy isn't a familiar threat like plastic pollution metaphor or pshysically inevitable end of the world) from an alien's or humans' perspective? The new worlds from all of theirs? We sort of end up relating most to Grace, except she dies in the first episode. The thing is, it is in confrontation with the established that we learn most about the characters. Nothing characterizes Nine more than his interactions with the Daleks, going from torturing one to deciding he can't commit another planetary destruction to stop them. Basically, between a kind straight Black navy officer and a White lesbian strangling her wife in a jealous rage, you're likelier to recognize Othello in the latter. Something tells me this is why RTD had Fifteen interact with another Doctor, Donna, Mel, Kate, UNIT, the Toymaker and even toothied Master before sending him on his own merry way.

The second problem has more to do with the direction the story actually went in. Because just from the above, and indeed after s11 it was a frequent praise of the era, it would look like Chibs is going for something easily accessible to new audiences. Great. But then comes s12 and basically all of the emotional pay off comes from the audience's attitude to the the lore! Or, maybe I'll put it this way: all charitable interpretations of it are rooted in not only lore literacy, but specific readings of established lore. And not only is the lore hardly established for the newcomers, but it's also not established which parts are to be cherry picked for the returning audience. Nowhere is it better visible than in Fugitive!Doctor's TARDIS being a police box. This was clearly meant to tell the audience yes, this is indeed the Doctor's TARDIS, but if you know how much of a deal pre-Hartnell Doctors would be, you'd also know the TARDIS doesn't just look like a police box, it was stuck looking like one in 1963. And so we end up with secret third Doctor theories between classic series 6 and 7.

And this is the fundamental problem with the timeless child. It shakes the lore to the core, but without establishing what this lore is, and how the audience is supposed to feel about it. Oh, you can go for post-colonial criticisms, but that relies on you reading the Time Lords as the british empire, a reading not clear to all of the audience, as exhibited by an actual academic article (because yes, I spent my hard earned money on a collection of academic articles about ChibnallWho and no I absolutely won't share a pdf should anyone dm me) written by an author more rooted in feminist than post-colonial critical theories seeing the new origin of Time Lords as replacing a masculine creatio ex nihilo ethos by that of a feminine explorer-scientist [appreciative]. You're basically supposed to get a phantom pain of a lore that's both alive and dead until observed, the presumed intention being that you will have a positive or negative feelings about the cat, without considering most people will be either abstractly impressed by the metaphor, or equally abstractly disturbed by animal abuse. It's criticising the roman empire by debunking it being founded by Mars's children raised by a she-wolf.

And this is also visible in the Doctor's own reaction to the revelation, which I guess you might argue is complex, but I would say it's more shifting from establishing moment to establishing moment. She goes from being shocked by it (again, no part of the text informed me I shouldn't cherry pick her characterization as including calling Time Lords the most rotten civilization in the universe, also is it even established that's the second time Gallifrey was destroyed?), to describing it as empowering, to apparently not thinking about it for 100 years, to having an identity crisis, to stating her identity is about what she does, to bemoaning the could-have-beens, to deciding she doesn't want to know, to her deepest desire being wanting to know it after all (the vision of ttc in potd). Like, come on, not finding your glasses means your room is messy, not complex. The effect is infantilizing more than anything else, I mean it's been what, three months since the last time a villain informed a heroine she has an epic origin that's also very horrible in The rise of Skywalker? Which impression is amplified by the only clue as to the Doctor's personal, not performed, attitude being that she apparently finds the cliche chosen one story of a boy abused by his adoptive family turning out to be a wizard, and a special wizard at that, comforting. Probably not the intended reading that wouldn't even be available if Rowling got cancelled earlier, but there as things are.

And of course, this has a lot of bearing on how thoschei dynamic is executed. On the one hand we have the entire emotional pay off rooted in the "history between them", on the other vague references to Classic Who and expanded universe, on the third characterization of the Master that is rooted more in fanon Freud-for-dummies woobification than anything this character's motivations have ever been established as. Like, between the charitable reading "Thirteen is hostile to the Master because of the events of s10" and the anti-charitable reading of "Missy's development was retconned in the Master's hostility", the answer is, it doesn't bloody matter to the story at hand, or else it's the writer's job to point to it as meaningful (again, as Maxine Alderton did with cybermenification in THOVD). Another case of "I don't agree with Moffat, but I agree the execution was functional", but you can juxtapose this with the way Simm!Master was presented in s10 - yeah, he got cured and kicked out of Gallifrey; that's really all you need to know, because his role in this story is being an unrepentant asshole and no amount of gifs slowing down John Simm turning his eyes down before saying "Eh, you wouldn't understand" will change that. The same goes for "see, the Master didn't destroy Gallifrey over everything that's been done to them, but over Theta being hurt uwu" interpretation - neither the reading this was the motivation, nor anything relating to the Master suffering from the Time Lords have been established in the text, neither as it unfolded nor as a pay off reveal! This basically relies on the attitude that the most charitable reading is by default the intended one, which is how you end up with "op means that Taylor Swift being gay shouldn't make you ignore all other gay women musicians".

A little bit of an aside, but people remember O was an actual person the Doctor met in unknown circumstances, not just a creation of the Master from the beginning, right? Like, this is taken into account in all "he's so desperate to be friends again uwu" readings, right?

So this is why "if the history between means anything" quote falls flat to me. The meaning is rooted in lore that's brushed aside in the same breath. The author relies on it being meaningful for the audience, while providing only the bare bones of "we were friends, but took completely different paths" background, and that by the end of the first act. Just as he relies on the audience having an emotional attachment to the lore without doing anything to create that attachment.

[saintsenara]

Another eager follower of your blog here - checking it is always a highlight of my day! I can't think of any ships atm, so instead, thoughts on a trope?? In my youth, I read a lot of FF net era fics where Hermione Isn't Really Muggleborn - usually her parents are Bellatrix and Voldemort (and she ends up becoming the next dark lady), although I've also seen various other purebloods, like Regulus, suggested (1/2)

thank you very much for the ask, anon - this is extremely kind! and i'm delighted to expand from unhinged ships to unhinged tropes!

although i'll be honest that this specific trope has never hit for me.

i understand the appeal - we all love a bit of the princess diaries-style "ordinary person doesn't realise they're actually important" glamour - but i just really don't enjoy anything which implies that the blood-supremacist viewpoint which voldemort espouses is the correct one.

it always seems to me that the main thesis underpinning the "hermione isn't really muggleborn" trope is that she couldn't be as good at magic as she canonically is without wizarding blood. obviously, this undermines the entire central point of the harry potter series, which i don't think is great even in fanfiction - but the more important point is that it's not even an interesting way of undermining the series' central premise.

there is a lot which can be done in a "voldemort wins" scenario with the fact that - right on the canon page - the order of the phoenix is a profoundly unradical group committed to defending a vision of wizarding society which is just the status quo with a couple of minor adjustments. it's incredibly striking in canon that the non-human communities of magical britain - goblins, werewolves etc. - overwhelmingly support voldemort, as do the sort of working-class wizards who sign up for the snatchers, and his coup in deathly hallows [and his politics during the first war] can be written surprisingly easily as populist ones. i think you could hook hermione into his messaging, for example, by making him someone who appears - when he's around her, at least - to care about house elves...

equally, voldemort's commitment to pragmatism - which many people might also describe as a commitment to hypocrisy - can be used to write him as willing to make an exception for a muggleborn hermione, who is by far the member of the trio who would make the best death eater. something very interesting can be done with the fact that she would, i think, be possible to corrupt into a "dark lady" - especially one who held the viewpoint, as dumbledore did, that muggles should be subjected to wizarding control for their own good...

and i also think - as someone regrettably invested in the concept of a bellamort baby - that the "this kid was born hermione riddle" [except they'd have chosen a worse name] concept could be interesting in the right hands. we know from voldemort's own experience - as well as harry's - that magical children who are orphaned and/or adopted into muggle homes and institutions have a pretty grim time of things, and the journey of figuring out their life-story which all adoptees go on has an extra tangle of threads caused by the division between the two worlds. that hermione's relationship with the drs granger is canonically quite distant is always worth thinking about - and examining that relationship through the lens of them being adoptive parents could be a fun way of doing it.

but i will never be convinced that the alternative - "hermione is a secret pureblood and that explains why she's so clever and hot" - is interesting in the slightest.

great crackfic potential though.

[quendiviner]

what's the cynosure project 🎤 what does it aim to achieve and what is it actually achieving? is it public knowledge? what would the public reaction be to it if it is not currently public knowledge? who gets hurt - are the researchers and staff involved as much victims as the targets or are they complicit and bystood?

hope u don't mind me using long hair toby. or well, actually, not exactly long hair toby but like, toby right after its long hair era. haha. anyway. i looked at these questions and somehow went "oh this could sound like it's opening up to someone about it." someone it trusts a lot.

older toby's opinions here if u want to read them too.

will maybe add a drawing later once i draw it. but, well, haven't had time to do work on it 😭

toby's answer under the cut. warnings for death mention.

"We, um. We were testing out if there's a way to, um, create a hibernation-like state in emergencies so that it would be less likely for the badly injured patient to die while, um, waiting for help. And additionally to that, have the technology that causes such state also try and stop the bleeding. The idea is that it would be helpful since the patient wouldn't, well, bleed out on the street. While waiting for the EMT to arrive or to get to the hospital. Um, things like that. At least that's what was the long term goal..."

"No one really knows about it, it was a secret project and only some parts of it were public because it was, well, it was my doctorate topic. A thesis fair idea that got the corpo headhunters really excited. Signed up for an accelerated phd program this corporation and one university had, which basically meant, um, working in a corporate lab and whatever you come up with is their property. And that they make most decisions on how to use it in the end."

"The only public information, as much as I know, were my articles and doctorate, which didn't really say much about the project itself, only about how it could be possible to have a human in such state based on the tests."

"I don't know what would be the public's reaction if they found out about it.... especially about what happened in the end. It's um, well. I think Mackie would be in ruins? One can hope, anyway."

"During the tests we found that, while it does work as intended, it could also, well, be used in a wrong way. As a weapon, kinda. A bit of reprogramming or a glitch, and it would make a clueless carrier drop dead because the tech would block out their blood vessels, or won't let cells get oxygen. It was really bad. We mentioned about it once to the project leader and the steering group, saying that precautions should be made so that wouldn't happen."

"What do we get instead? Well. A few months later the steering group's report accidentally comes up to my, um, friend, Jack. He finds a mention of this exact problem there, except it's listed as 'possible other uses'. Honestly? I don't know what I expected from a corporation, but, well. I didn't know what they're like back then, I guess."

"We ended up deciding to bring this up to the media. It sounded like a good idea. Jack did some searching and we were contacted by this, um, anonymous person who claimed he were working for one newspaper. He told us he needs the whole report for the article, which only existed on a physical drive in the archive. We, um, planned a heist."

"Everything was going well for most of the time, until a guard showed up. Jack shot them. I ran to them and tried to help them, while ignoring Jack telling me to leave. We got into a small argument and in the end he just...left. The guard survived, at least, they even sent me a thank you card with a photo of their family, everyone being so happy. But, um... Jack didn't. They found his body at the place where we were supposed to meet this media person. I still don't know what happened, but I guess something went wrong and, well..." *long pause*

"I don't know if we could have stopped it. We told them it's a risk and that it should be made sure that this would not be possible. They pushed this part of development to the end of the backlog, and, well. I don't know. Maybe it wouldn't have happened if we would've continued to say how important it is to get rid of it or how unhappy we are about it? Or if I went to talk to the steering group about it?"

"I, um, I.... I feel like this is all my fault, as someone who came up with the whole thing... and as someone who picked the wrong way to try and solve the problem..."

[speakofcompersion]

6, 7, 15, 19, 22, 23

omg hello @cut-catches <33

i hope my answers are interesting, thanks for playing!! :))

6. how long have you been into kpop?

so, so long my goodness.. since 2006, when i was in the 6th grade i think? Was super big into TVXQ at the time (big heartbreak when they broke up, let me tell you). a friend from school introduced me right before they moved away and i've been stuck here ever since (i say this lovingly ofc)

7. which song introduced you to kpop?

i think... my friend played me Super Junior's "Happiness" first? but also showed me Big Bang, which must have been their earliest releases given their debut was around i believe

15. your favourite hairstyle on your bias?

oh dear.. this is tough. Gotta do all of shinee, ofc + i probably have some pretty predictable answers, but here we go:

jjong: pretty pink haired babe, and there's nothing that tops that <3

taem: nothing beats just plain black hair to me, but i also love the long hair from Sherlock era. I know he hated it sooo bad, but i didn't :')

key: that cute rainbow buzzcut <3333 yes.

onew: i also LOVE long hair on him. The rock of ages one, but especially that recent photo shoot (this one: x) had me tumbling head over heals

minho: just.. classic black <3 but i love when it's less quaffed, a bit curly? :)

19. All time favourite kpop songs?

this is too hard i question, i fear. very sorry lol. To be honest, i tend to prefer groups with b-sides that outshine their title tracks, so i'll just put the groups i prefer best: Shinee, Twice, StayC, old school TVXQ, XG, Red Velvet, Kara, and many more. I'm sorry i'm in too deep to answer this

22. your favourite concepts?

Taemin. Truly his career has what i would call an actual thesis to it, developed and thought out in a way that i haven't really seen matched elsewhere. The king of concept. He has also stayed true to his root, which i can't appreciate enough.

And i guess that fun, bubble gum pop that Twice and StayC do really well! Kpop helps me release my stress, so i'm partial to things that make me want to dance

23. your favourite choreagraphies?

For Shinee, it's Sherlock, Replay and View my beloveds. They're just so iconic to me; all of Taemin's, but special shoutout to choreo's Koharu worked on and Black Rose (cause she's so visually stunning to me); Twice Fancy (they have such good formations and they're so clean with it <3); TVXQ Mirotic; the GODLY Stay Tonight choreo from Chungha (god, she lives in my mind constantly); ..etc

Thank you <3 this was a lot of fun. Hope you enjoyed my answers

[handweavers]

maurice (the book, the movie which is pretty close to the book all things considered, etc) has a lot of problems like fundamentally it's definitely a product of its time and of the man (e.m forster) who wrote it and the state of the british empire and culture in his lifetime, his biases and failings of his ideology are clear when reading his writing.

but there really is something so endlessly fascinating to me about it Because of that, if that makes sense, because it really does capture the mindset of an Edwardian era middle class white British man and all that entails, and how the quintessential version of that man might react when faced with his desire for men and only men, and the ways in which that might very realistically be experienced and expressed.

this is especially notable because he wrote it privately, knowing he couldn't publish it until after he died or until some distant day when british culture could cope with a book like that, and so many of the characters are inspired by himself and the other white British gay men he knew from all walks of life and it's sort of just written for them and so it feels very personal and insightful to that entire mindset and experience of the time. like it functions as such an excellent snapshot of that time and place and group of people and it's simultaneously a work of complete fantasy and the overwhelming whiteness and britishness of it and the very premise (as well as the solution offered by it) is something entirely a product of itself, if that makes sense, like this book only could have been written in these conditions and in this context.

analysing it feels like placing an entire worldview and experience in a fish tank and spinning it around - noticing what it says and what it doesn't, what is left out, how events are framed, the thesis of the story, the entire thing is fascinating no matter what angle you take and it's so self indulgent and confessional it's just the whole thing laid bare in a way that is really rare imo

especially w the emphasis on class in particular as a defining thing in the story, like maurice is fundamentally an exploration of class and forster tries to grapple with these things clumsily and using the only language and approach he knows how to because of the circumstances of his own life, and you can see the limits of his understanding of class dynamics through the book, the fault lines in his thinking and his contradictory opinions on working class people and old money gentry and the middle class and all of that. like it's Not a marxist look at class whatsoever but I always find things like that really fascinating because they're trying to grapple with class consciousness and they're so close and yet so far and in maurice it's wrapped up in anxieties about white male masculinity and british propriety and the specific strange brand of late victoria /edwardian period misogyny and you get the benefits and consequences of empire and british racism laid bare on a kind of deeply insular, commonplace level without ever once mentioning let alone featuring a nonwhite person at all. like the Lack of mention of these things feeds into the fantasy aspect of it and the self indulgence of it.

bc at it's core it's just all so loud and it's an edwardian era white cis gay affluent british mans fantasy of his ideal man and ideal relationship and that fantasy of escaping class society to some """"primitive"""" state where they can just Be but there's no room for that within the british empire and it's so so so so indulgent in that way and so revealing. theres so much to unpack and so much that still feels relevant to the experience of white middle class gay people in the imperial core today and their mindset and anxieties and the whole thing is just endlessly interesting to me in a "I want to study this in a laboratory" way. like it's the kind of book that makes me want to do a marxist analysis of the entire ideology on display here and how it's still relevant to current class anxieties and fantasies of escapism within certain communities - like the cottagecore thing - and pick it apart and examine its innards because it reveals so much at just a rudimentary level and whenever I reread it there's something new I think about and come away with

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

https://x.com/reihan/status/1796279232366100721

What the 'modern racism' thesis obscures

By: Reihan Salam

Published: May 30, 2024

Just about everyone agrees that racism is bad. But what counts as racism?

For over fifty years, social scientists have relied on “modern racism” scales to study intergroup attitudes. This is a rich, complex subject that I won’t be able to do justice to in a (long!) tweet. The short version is that as overt racism declined in the decades following the civil rights movement, scholars sought to understand how racial attitudes in particular were changing. The idea was that overt racism was being supplanted by symbolic racism, or racial resentment.

Think of a person—let’s call her “Karen”—who says that she is not at all prejudiced against Blacks, but who believes that the persistence of Black disadvantage is more a reflection of the choices made by particular Black individuals or Black families than of structural barriers. According to the modern racism framework, Karen would count as racially resentful. There is a rich literature that uses these modern racism scales to make sense of partisan political divides in the U.S., and at the risk of oversimplification, the upshot is that to be a racial liberal is to be lacking in racial resentment and to be a racial conservative is to be racially resentful. If this sounds to you a bit like saying that to be on the political right is to suffer from an egregious character flaw, well, I see where you’re coming from.

But what if racially resentful Karen said the exact same thing about Lithuanians, Bangladeshis, working-class white natives, Appalachians, or the left-handed as she did about Blacks when presented with the same vignette?

In that case, it’s not obvious that the language of racism—modern or otherwise—is especially helpful.

The Karen scenario I’ve laid out is roughly how so-called modern racism manifests itself in practice. As the political scientists Ryan Enos and Riley Carney have observed, “modern racism questions appear to measure attitudes toward any group, rather than African Americans alone.” Enos and Carney suggest that these scales are capturing two different phenomena: first, racial sympathy toward Blacks—understood as a belief that Black Americans have been uniquely damaged by the history of slavery and segregation, and that it is therefore wrong to evaluate them as we would members of other groups—and second, “just world belief,” or the belief that hard work generally pays off and people are largely responsible for their life outcomes, regardless of race.

One awkward fact for the partisans of the modern racism thesis is that it’s not just whites who appear to be racially resentful—for as long as modern racism scales have been around, many Black, Latin, and Asian respondents have expressed the belief that Blacks are more or less similar to other people, and that U.S. society (while imperfect) does generally allow people of any race or color to succeed by virtue of their own merits. That is, these scales have found that these Black, Latin, and Asian respondents are symbolic racists.

To draw on a recent piece by John Sides and Michael Tesler, the Obama-era electorate was less polarized about race—because nonwhite racial conservatives backed Democrats—and more polarized by race—for the same reason. And in a sense, this represented a kind of stolen valor for progressive anti-racists — they could operate under the illusion that they enjoyed the monolithic support of people of color, when in fact many of them supported Democrats despite their commitment to progressive anti-racism.

A decade ago, progressive intellectuals were thus confident that the demographic transformation of the American electorate would soon yield a progressive majority that would unite college-educated white liberals, Black Americans, and working-class immigrants and their descendants—a rainbow coalition that would vanquish a reactionary coalition composed of aging rural whites. Without giving it much thought, they assumed that this disconnect between partisanship and ideology among nonwhites would persist.

But of course that isn’t quite how things have panned out. In particular, the working-class Latin voters whom progressive intellectuals saw delivering lasting left-of-center majorities are in fact trending right.

This realization is already shaping the calculations of political professionals on the left. In April, the Washington Post reported that progressive activists were starting to have doubts about voter registration drives, long a mainstay of progressive political organizing. The reason? As an influential progressive data scientist put it in a confidential memo, “if we were to blindly register nonvoters and get them on the rolls, we would be distinctly aiding [Donald] Trump’s quest for a personal dictatorship.” He also warned that because so many younger nonvoters and non-Black people of color were trending right, the only safe bet was for progressive nonprofits to focus exclusively on registering Black voters.

And so the future of American politics won’t pit a multiethnic rainbow coalition on one side of the political-ideological divide against a monoracial white coalition on the other—ideological conflict, class conflict, and racial conflict won’t line up along neat lines of fracture.

This might strike you as a good and healthy development — that’s certainly how I see it —but for some on the left, this rainbow vs. reactionary vision of racial conflict had a powerful moral resonance. Progressive anti-racists envisioned a conflict between right and left as a struggle between oppressors and oppressed, between perpetrators of racial injustice and victims of racial injustice, bolstered, crucially, by righteous white allies.

As we approach the midpoint of this decade, what’s emerging instead is something entirely different—a clash between two multiethnic coalitions. The multiethnic coalition on the left, united by a particular vision for racial progress, is arrayed against a multiethnic coalition on the right, united by its opposition to that vision.

The conflict between anti-racists and anti-racialists is an ideological conflict about race, not a conflict in which white supremacists are subjugating marginalized racial others. While this conflict certainly has high stakes, it bears no moral resemblance to Bull Connor ordering the use of fire hoses and police dogs on civil rights protesters.

For all her professed racial progressivism, Katherine Maher, the chief executive of National Public Radio, is not the moral equivalent of Martin Luther King Jr. Chinese American parents fighting for race-blind admissions in the public schools of Fairfax County, Virginia, are not arch-segregationists. You can pretend otherwise—it may well be profitable to pretend otherwise, or comforting—but to do so is to blind yourself to the changing contours of American politics.

[odaclan]

Rotating volley technique possibly exist in Sengoku Japan

Previously in my Nagashino post, I mentioned that the popular story of the rotating volley tactic is considered dubious. The main reason for it is that the source of it is completely unknown. At some point it became a just-so story in the Edo era, and was affirmed as fact by the Meiji government, clearly without properly checking its veracity. 

Even Oze Hoan’s Shinchouki text (this is not Ota Gyuuichi’s Shinchoukouki), which is already considered dubious in the first place, only recorded that the Oda forces had 3000 guns. It also did not describe a rotating volley tactic. 

However, even if this artillery tactic is not explicitly used in the Nagashino battle, there is proof that the Japanese troops are aware of and seemingly well-trained trained in this tactic at least as of the late Sengoku. It was known to have been used in Hideyoshi’s Korean war, as recounted by the people of Ming and Joseon:

In 1593, for example, Ming General Song Yingchang (宋應唱, 1536－1606) noted that the Japanese employed the musketry volley technique, writing that he feared the Japanese would “break into squads and shoot alternately against us (分番休迭之法).” In 1595, Korean King Sŏnjo shared the same apprehension that “the Japanese [would] divide themselves into three groups and shoot alternately by moving forward and backward (若分三運, 次次放砲)?”

From "Big Heads, Bird Guns and Gunpowder Bellicosity: Revolutionizing the Chosŏn Military in Seventeenth Century Korea", a thesis by Kang Hyeok Hweon.

Maybe there were records of this method employed in domestic battle that the researchers just haven’t discovered yet. For now it’s still unclear where and when the Japanese troops learned of this. Just that they seem well trained enough in it during the battles mentioned above. 

It’s noteworthy, however, that this rotating volley tactic was already a very well-known method of warfare in China as early as 750s AD in the Tang dynasty. First, it was used by archery and crossbow units. Then, they evolved the technique to be used with guns. Below is a description of a battle in the year 1414:

“The commander-in-chief (都督) Zhu Chong led Lü Guang and others directly to the fore, where they assaulted the enemy by firing firearms and guns continuously and in succession. Countless enemies were killed.”

From “The Gunpowder Age: China, Military Innovation, and the Rise of the West in World” by Tonio Andrade. 

Especially noteworthy is that the enemy’s army described in this passage are also mounted troops. It’s not impossible that the Japanese somehow learned of the above literature from Ming, and then put it in practice, though without proof we cannot assume too much.

King Seonjo’s description, specifically, sounds like the kind of rotating volley usually described in the Nagashino stories. This brings to mind how many times I’ve seen cases of Edo period stories inserting anachronistic objects or settings into narratives of the past, so it could be how this legend was born. Perhaps the Edo storytellers took the volley technique that wasn’t known or used until later, and just assigned it to Nagashino for dramatic flair. 

[demi-shoggoth]

2023 Reading Log pt 12

56. Life Between the Tides by Adam Nicholson. This book really, really wants to be High Literary Art. The author writes about tide pools and coastal organisms, but is much more interested in dissecting what these have represented in art, culture and a Jungian sense of shared humanity more than he is in the actual animals, algae and other things he encounters. Throughout the book, he builds three artificial tide pools, each time devising ways to carve rock and set up filters to catch water but exclude some organisms, and I couldn’t help but think, why? Why not find natural tide pools and observe them? Why must you put your stamp on a coastline? His whole thesis seems to be something about the beauty of how the shore is a liminal place, between land and water, where ecosystems and humans alike exist in an unstable equilibrium, and yet he feels the need to attempt to control it, and does not reflect much on the contradiction. I did not care for this book, as either a work of natural history or philosophy.

57. Spirit Beings in European Folklore 1 by Benjamin Adamah. A birthday gift from my girlfriend, @abominationimperatrix. This is one of a four part encyclopedia of European monsters—this volume focuses on Scandinavia and the British Islands. The decision to edit it into multiple volumes was made relatively late in the book’s development, and it shows—there are cross references to entries that do not appear in this book, but are in other volumes. The author is an occultist, and so plays somewhat coy with whether or not he believes in the literal existence of supernatural entities; near as I can tell from this volume, he’s a believer in the idea that they have material reality as thoughtforms created by human imagination. Putting aside that quirk (which is fairly easy to do), this is a pretty good compendium of monsters, especially but not limited to the sorts of things that would be called “fey” and “undead” in RPG terms. I do have the whole set, and am looking forward to reading the rest of them.

58. If It Sounds Like a Quack… by Matthew Hongolz-Hetling. This book is a look into “alternative medicine” grifts and cranks, following the stories of six quacks from their origins to the modern day. This modern day is the COVID era, where even the most reasonable-sounding of them goes off the deep end into conspiracy theories and anti-immigrant hysteria. The author does an excellent job of using alternative medicine as a lens to look at how consensus reality has been damaged in the United States, and there are a surprising amount of connections, both direct and indirect, between these frauds and perhaps the most successful con artist of the modern era, Donald Trump (who the book refers to exclusively as “the game show host”). The book has a light touch and is very funny throughout, which makes the ending, where he discusses how people are committing real murders in the belief that COVID vaccines are turning people into zombies, hit all the harder.

59. Remnants of Ancient Life by Dale E. Greenwalt. This is a book about biomolecules found in fossils, from the famous (like pigments found in dinosaur feathers) to the rather more obscure (using trace elements to pinpoint the affinities of conodonts and Tullimonstrum). The author is an entomologist by trade, and so is a little bit unclear about the appropriate taxonomy for other groups—an editing pass over the chapters about dinosaurs would have been useful. Perhaps the most interesting chapter is on the supposed discovery of dinosaur proteins, such as collagen and even intact blood vessels, which have been almost entirely done by the lab of Mary Schwietzer, and thus are the subject of a lot of debate and skepticism.

60. Strange Bedfellows by Ina Park. This is a book about sexually transmitted infections. It can be divided roughly in half—the first half is chapter long looks at particular topics, like the stigmatization of herpes and the possible health risks of vigorous pubic hair removal. The second half is a historical survey of the history of government investigation of sexual health, including both unethical human experiments such as at Tuskegee and Guatemala, as well as the history of contract tracing in public health offices. The author’s voice comes through strongly—she’s funny and opinionated and not at all ashamed at working in a sex related field. Mary Roach wrote one of the blurbs on the back of the book, and that seems like a pretty apt comparison.

[cavewretch]

nostalgic absurdism, a media (crit?) list

this black eyed peas music video that came out in 2023 is my thesis statement for this entire concept please watch it i could write a whole paper just about this video. the dead eyed stares of every performer. the star wars font. the lyrics dripping in so much party language it hurts. the "i feel so alive" delivered so incredibly lifelessly. the chorus being "dont worry about a thing, because everything's gonna be alright". it's black eyed peas, shakira, and david guetta giving you the shallowest most haunting memory of 2014 you could imagine. it's phenomenal. oh and aliens. shakira suddenly becomes the leader of the alien dance team but now she has blue eyes. the black eyed peas are abducted at the end. please watch it i beg

ok anyway on to the list (ongoing so this post will continue to be updated) (feel free to send suggestions 🫶)

i have two spotify playlists for this that i made a couple years ago. i stopped using spotify last year so they aren't updated but here is RECE$$10N and Pandemic Era - Nostalgic Absurdism .

song special mentions from those playlists:

save by nct127 - the samsung memory card ad campaign sponsored futuristic-with-some-plants-music-video kpop party song

bo burnham's inside (i am not talking about him as the media-criticizer, i am arguing his special is of this era? moment? itself. im putting him here as a critique)

any song that goes viral on tiktok

most musicians that come out of tiktok

any official sped-up version release (not youtube nightcore)

any covid-themed special release (songs with titles like socialdistancing, new normal, lockdown, etc) . i believe that we will win by pitbull which takes the american government's approach of "viruses are an entity capable of morality and this evil enemy is combatable" . other insane songs: you are the champions (queen/adam lambert, for Health Workers), masks, gloves, soap, scrubs (todrick hall, also for Health Workers)

old groups coming together to make new music in the face of "these trying times" aka jonas brothers, big time rush, abba, etc

hear me out. the 2022 minions sequel soundtrack especially turn up the sunshine diana ross/tame impala

non-music:

fashion trends (90s 80s 2000s 2010s)

every remake reboot sequel prequel of the last 10 years (star wars etc)

marvel movies

streaming services for everything

shows/movies being filmed for clipability and vertical phone screens

stranger things

minions meme resurgence (this was happening in 2022 on twitter)

old meme resurgence in general (i saw a troll face one recently) (sure it's done in the post-post-post ironic way but it still has trollface)

d&d resurgence (something something methods of theater/storytelling adapting to the social climate)

playlist updates (since i stopped using spotify)

3d country by geese

ogoin & linguini: tv show (this is brasil specific i don't get all the references myself but it's fun to listen to)

only god was above us by vampire weekend

raw data feel & mountainhead by everything everything

january never dies by balming tiger

two night by tierra whack

gangsta by free nationals, asap rocky, & anderson .paak

mos thoser by food house,

>something something nostalgia as a tool / umberto eco ur-fascism

growing up online a neighbor to this line of thought

[ilgaksu]

🎉 and 💔 for the fic writer asks?

from this series of fic writer asks

🎉 What leads you to consider a fic a success?

definitely engagement. i actually have several fics abandoned currently because of lack of engagement.

(the one that came to my mind immediately is the fic discussing hei xiazi's past as a sex worker in canon, which never did as well as i hoped, but also i had very limited hopes for the appeal of a fic about a cis and very masc man's relationship to female-oriented sex work. it is, however, entirely accurate to the actual sex work industry in the country he was operating in, as well as refusing to view sex work with anything but respect for a profession. do i sound bitter? i'm a little bit bitter.)

in my original writing career, engagement is less of a pressing issue to me because i have exchanged actual money or some other form of renumeration for labour. fic for me is less a handing over an item (because outside of a commission, you haven't paid for access to it and also then do not take any ownership of it or rights to it) and more of a form of communication with other fans. i want the influencer-capitalism shift of fan subculture into content creators and content consumers as two separate groups to die in a fire, actually. subcultures should not seek to mimic the dominant culture; modern fandom was created, as i've said before to a friend, by a group of women in a house talking about star trek, who had the audacity to treat each other as equals to each other and to men, when the world refused to view any of them as such. there is no such thing as "more equal than others" outside of animal farm, and especially not based on productivity.

having said that, i think if i was pretending that engagement isn't part of the reason i'm spending my limited time on earth writing two fictional and borrowed people, i would be being disingenuous. i am using it as a form of communication and communion with other people who love the thing i love, and the fic itself is a way of me expressing and processing my love, especially in a sociohistorical era where we are often far more distanced from who we want to be in community with. everyone wants their work and love to be acknowledged, and the use of their time, especially when it's on something that is viewed as a waste of it in the dominant culture; especially when it's viewed as silly and small, because current western culture denigrates love of the silly and small, especially a big love of something that cannot be made fully marketable. and so, it's hard to feel like a little kid at show and tell with your craft project, only to feel as if all the other kids are just walking by. it's why i'm always open to questions about characterisation and construction of fics/headcanons/theories, as well as writing craft; i just don't discuss the last one unless asked very often because i dislike seeming as though i need to provide a thesis defense for my creative practice to preface my work. like, what are you, my phd supervisor?

but to go on further, because it's my blog and i can elaborate if i want to, there are other aspects too. to follow the argument for engagement further, i sometimes get comments that echo that i have verbalised or represented an experience that felt personal to someone, and personal to the point of it feeling isolating. when i specialised in trauma studies, i focused a whole dissertation on caruth's theory of the unspeakable in trauma and looked it with a literary studies focus. caruth argues, to try and condense it quickly, that trauma is the experience of an unspeakable event, and, by that argument, we can surmise that only by articulating the trauma can someone begin to process that trauma. (i think a lot about what it means to live in a current culture that is trauma-obsessed and obsessed with making our trauma marketable for the algorithm to the total invasion of privacy, and yet deeply lacking in empathy to when trauma makes a person behave outside the bounds of what they consider acceptable, btw. but that's another topic for another day.)

so, for example, getting a comment saying that someone has felt seen and heard feels incredible to me. even if that's the only comment i get on that fic, it feels like this form of communication in a world that's starved us of that kind of communication, and that will make the real work and time that goes into writing feel worthwhile.

however, overall, i've moved away from as being as metrics-focused as i once was. when i began writing in heihua fandom, for example, i assumed, with absolute certainty, that nobody was reading, that nobody was interested in what i had to say, that nothing i was writing would be viewed with grace. and as a result, i felt free in a way i hadn't in previous fandoms where i was very publically involved; if i was writing alone, just for me, what would i write? and so now a great deal of is a fic a success for me is based in: do i read it back to myself and enjoy the process of that? does it feel like, if it wasn't written by me, and i wasn't worried about egocentricity, i would acknowledge that this fic was made entirely to my own tastes? am i having fun? did i love the process?

those are the questions i try to focus on now, and so now it's about 50/50 with that and actual external engagement, which is huge progress.

💔 Is there a fic of yours that broke your heart?

OH, BOY, THIS ONE'S THE BRUTAL QUESTION.

short answer: yes, there's been several, and i immediately thought of them when you asked.

longer answer in a reply that's already had a very long answer:

several fics of mine reflect claustrophobia and hopelessness i felt at that point in my personal life. i am proud of them and i am proud of myself for them, but not because i believe the purpose of pain is to make art, or that it makes personal misery worthwhile. i am proud of them because of their honesty. they break my heart in that to look at these works at the point in my life i'm at now is to feel an intense love and compassion for the version of me who wrote them. i try and avoid autobiographical readings of my work, because i think they're often used to pigeonhole marginalised creators to fit into the box of literary criticism, but i think it's important as a creator to value how you can see your own personal development outside of just skill development in your own creative work.

[rmfantasysetpieces1]

The football economy is entering a new era Published: November 17, 2022 12:20pm EST

The idea that football is the "mirror" of society is often put forward in salons and turns out to be rather accurate from the point of view of its economy. Branko Milanovic, a renowned specialist in inequality and a fine football analyst, observes this well: "Football has been a mirror of society, where inequalities have increased exponentially over the last three decades," he explains in the columns of Forbes magazine.

At a time when the World Cup is criticised for its social and environmental organisational conditions,21st century football is not immune to the major economic debates of the day, particularly that of growth and inequality. In our opinion, all these questions are symptoms of a historical and economic transformation of this sport.

According to the English sociologist Richard Giulianotti, football has gone through four periods in its history. The traditional period extends from the establishment of the rules at the end of thenineteenth century until the First World War; early modernity corresponds to the interwar period when competitions were invented; late modernity, the one that saw professionalization take place, came to an end at the end of the 1980s; while the postmodern period began, that of media coverage, the liberalization of the labor market and growth.

The thesis we defend in our latest book is that we are now at the dawn of a new era that we describe as hypermodern.

Stars, bands, income, and viewers

Four characteristics allow us to define this hypermodernity. The first concerns economic inequalities, which have widened sharply in previous decades. They are observed on the one hand between the clubs of the same league, on the other hand between the different championships, and have the sporting consequence of competitions, both national and international, dominated by a few teams much richer than the others. They also concern the distribution of footballers' salaries, with an increasingly strong segmentation of the labour market in relation to stars, or even superstars.

The second characteristic is the arrival of new investor profiles, namely public and private investment funds, often American for the latter and already owners of team sports franchises across the Atlantic. Compared to the previous period, this change in "ownership" can have at least two consequences: football will now have to be financially profitable whether at the level of clubs or leagues; In addition, "galaxies" of clubs are formed around the same owner. The wealthy Emirati buyers of Manchester City, for example, have gradually brought eleven other clubs into their "City Football Group" since 2008, including New York FC, Palermo and Troyes. The third concerns the globalization strategy of the major clubs and leagues that provide them with increasingly substantial commercial revenues and international broadcasting rights. Finally, the last characteristic relates to the demand for football itself. It is the result of the arrival of new broadcasters such as Amazon Prime in France, the multiplication of broadcasting platforms and new ways of consuming football, especially among the younger generations.

Piketty at the penalty spot

The economics of football has thus become an interesting field for applying the analytical grid inspired by the global success of economist Thomas Piketty's book Capital in the Twenty-First Century, the first edition of which dates back to 2013. The author showed that the theme of wealth distribution and inequality are now at the heart of society. Football does not seem to be exempt from the rule.

Since the 1990s, the world of football has experienced very strong growth in the main European countries. Excluding transfers, club revenues come from four main sources: broadcasting rights, ticketing, sponsors and merchandise (jersey sales for example). All of them have increased significantly since the 1970s but in different proportions: ticketing, predominant fifty years ago, has gradually seen its share decrease in favour of TV rights and sponsorship in the major European clubs.

This economic boom has been accompanied by an increase in inequalities between clubs, at national and European level. As in society in general, this growth in inequality mainly concerns the top of the distribution. The share of revenue of the most upscale clubs has increased in the turnover of the leagues, which has resulted in an increased concentration of titles. In the German first division, for example, nine different clubs won the first division in the 1960s, five in the 1990s and only two since 2010.

Despite the growing incomes, the football economy remains a "smaller economy" than we think. Above all, until recently, it generated little or no profit for its shareholders. The fact is that many owners, billionaires or sovereign wealth funds, often buy teams for reasons other than the simple financial profitability of their investments: "soft power", nation branding or philanthropy are the key words.

Deserving stars? When football and inequality are linked, the question of players' salaries also comes to mind. The idea that they are "overpaid", at the individual level or in the clubs' wage bill, crosses the political field. The right formulates social criticisms, the left questions the liberalism that feeds them: there is, in any case, a certain consensus to see in the remuneration of footballers one of the sources of the supposed ills of the current football economy.

It should be noted that only a very small part of the players earn millions, while the majority have extremely short careers, about four years in the elite on average. In addition, less than one in three transfers is the subject of a monetary transaction in the five major leagues (England, Spain, Italy, Germany and France) and about one in seven worldwide.

The fact remains that there are strong inequalities between footballers and that these have also increased. Lowering the salaries of superstars, however, comes up against a "moral" impasse. These players have a talent that is far above average, the cost of which for the clubs is highly convex: the big teams are then ready to pay a high price for the "genius" of these extraordinary players, a unique talent that cannot be "substituted" for that of several "average" players. It is, moreover, to see the latter play that a fan pays for his ticket to the stadium, even if it harms the chances of seeing their favorite team win. From this point of view, if we adopt the philosophical principles of John Rawls, superstar footballers "deserve" their remuneration: the expression of their talent contributes to the well-being of the "community", especially disadvantaged backgrounds. Daniel Cohen, director of the Economics Department at the Ecole Normale Supérieure (ENS) in rue d'Ulm, puts it this way in a column written for Le Nouvel Obs:

"Football is the only case where young people, most often from working-class backgrounds, extort billionaires with their consent."

As the extension of Kylian Mbappé's contract at Paris Saint-Germain suggests, the trend is towards an increase in very high salaries likely to change the functioning of the football job market. We have probably gone from a system with two segments, superstars and others, to a system with three segments: the few hyperstar players, the more superstars and the others.

Empty stands Does this observation on inequalities defend the idea of football in crisis, in a post-pandemic context? Contrary to everything that was announced by the wooden prophets, what the coronavirus has changed in football, apart from the financial difficulties that the entire economy has suffered, is nothing or not much and we are certainly not living through the apocalypse! The most visible "crisis" was that of the fans due to the generalized closed doors from March 2020 and throughout the 2020-2021 season. Beyond its financial aspects, the absence of the public was felt on two levels. From a sporting point of view, without this "twelfth man", we could wonder if it became less of an advantage to play at home than usual. Taking advantage of this "natural experiment", economists have come to nuanced conclusions regarding the outcome of the matches, but not about the refereeing. The men in black were more lenient for the visiting team in the empty stadiums, revealing a role of "social pressure" from the fans.

Above all, it gave television broadcasts without the flavor of an atmosphere. The lesson to be learned from this is that this dimension of the "spectacle" to which supporters are no strangers must therefore be taken into account when measuring the importance of TV rights in club budgets. Maradona said that "Playing behind closed doors is like playing in a cemetery".

Fans have also recently been burned by the proposal of some presidents of major clubs to "secede" through the (aborted) project of a more or less closed Super League. This recurrent project, and relaunched in recent weeks, of a European championship illustrates, in our opinion, an economic necessity to reform competitions, a development that is undoubtedly one of the main current challenges in professional football. The creation of the Super League, the culmination of all the elements characterising the hypermodernity of football, would then constitute the "apotheosis". URL https://theconversation.com/leconomie-du-football-entre-dans-une-nouvelle-ere-194706

#rmsoccer

[sailorspica]

hello i am in my bg stan era these men (btob) are my thesis hell companions, i have a k-pop side blog where i swore not to post text so that's why we're here

eunkwang. rip my opera ambitions but he is also the handsomest to Me

hyunsik. love his smile and his darker-colored voice

changsub. i have worked in musical theater; love his interactions with gidle and solar

in no order, they alternate in my affections:

ilhoon. i love cube rappers what can i say

sungjae. big fan of two of his dramas

peniel. he looks exactly like my little brother which is a double edged sword

minhyuk. he is so annoying to me which is arguably a more powerful reaction than love, love his interactions w gidle

fuck cube but i miss boy and girl group interactions especially if they're the same company, snsd and minho on running man my beloved

[garyh2628]

Season’s Greetings

The world has delivered a new playbook that will drive impactful development and lead to a better quality of life for people everywhere. World Bank. World Bank Annual Report 2023 : A New Era in Development (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group. 

This year has been especially great and important for Modern Selfcare, including Nutrition, Consumer Health, and Development, Value-Based and Integrated Care and Complementary and Integrative Health, thanks to our Value Proposition strengthened by my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy and our Modern Selfcare thesis. The past year has seen an extraordinary level of Modern Selfcare activities at the macro level. This year saw the infrastructure put in place both at the national and international level for the completion of the build-out of our Modern Selfcare thesis, and my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy. This was done through a new strategy mission, strategy and operational pivots, and legislation, spurring a new era for Health, Development, and Triumphant Living as a Culture at the Consumer and Household levels. Thus, The Global Structure Network Limited www.theglobalstructurenetwork.com became the critical hinge in the buildout of this new global social infrastructure. This new playbook and global pivot aim to strengthen the existing Consumer and Household architecture.

So, what are the benefits of Modern Selfcare strengthened by our Modern Selfcare Value Proposition, Modern Selfcare Thesis, and my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy? The Global Mission pivot is structured around Quality-of-life Outcomes such as Health, Resilience, Education; Economic Empowerment, and Boosting Shared Prosperity just to name a few. When the world chose our Modern Selfcare Value Proposition strengthened by my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy, as the frame of reference for their Modern Selfcare transition and policy, they recognised us as the organising principle and main accelerator for this new direction. As the main accelerator, we pioneer and drive access, putting Stakeholders and Shareholders on a fast track for the reinvention needed to achieve Quantity and Quality of Human Capital and the future readiness of Consumers and Households. Additionally, our Modern Selfcare Framework and Modern Selfcare History also incentivize Stakeholders and Shareholders to redesign strategy content from a multidimensional perspective by refocusing Modern Selfcare actions toward the Outcomes that matter most to people. www.theglobalstructurenetwork.com

The horizontal and vertical alignment of strategy actions is crucial to the success of Modern Selfcare strategies at the Consumer and Household levels, and our Modern Selfcare lens www.theglobalstructurenetwork.com aligns the interests of multiple stakeholders. Similarly, Consumers and Households should align actions and conceptualise Value in a way that ensures they receive value for their high levels of Modern Selfcare spending. We reconnect our stakeholders and shareholders with the people their Modern Selfcare strategies are intended to reach, regulating actions for the appropriate purpose through targeting the drivers of their Modern Selfcare Outcomes i.e. we are the drivers of those Outcomes. We also connect those strategies to the private sector, which plays an important role in shaping the right environment. Most importantly, we are the Root of Trust for our Stakeholders, Shareholders, Consumers and Households Modern Selfcare Strategy and Policy.

The world has delivered a new playbook that will drive impactful development and lead to a better quality of life for people everywhere. A new strategy that is sustainable through Economic Growth, Human Development, Financial Inclusion, Nutrition, and Food Security and access to clean air, water, and affordable energy. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/099092823161580577/BOSIB055c2cb6c006090a90150e512e6beb

This new playbook gives priority to the socioeconomic rights needed to achieve the Modern Selfcare Outcomes, how these rights are realised, and how these socioeconomic rights will facilitate the Value of the new global social infrastructure, which places an imperative on governments and national and international institutions to realise these rights. Thus, you might have read in our earlier posts https://www.gsdiandadvocacy.co.uk/blog about the actions governments and international institutions are taking to deliver these Modern Selfcare Outcomes. It also places an imperative on Consumers and Households to realise these rights by employing the right type of Ownership. This new playbook and global pivot aim to strengthen the existing Consumer and Household architecture.

Ownership in the context of Modern Selfcare and Consumer Health and Development strictly speaking refers to For Profit – For Value Ownership reflecting investment in Health, Development, and Triumphant Living as a Culture. It is a process that Consumers and Households employ that will meet their needs for:

Triumphant Living, The Quantified Self, The Institution of Household Efficiency, Operational Resilience   

Disease Prevention, Health Promotion, Cultural Transformation, and Quality Enhancement   

Knowledge, Healthy Resilience, Healthy Longevity, Operational Resilience and Efficacy.  

The current structural buildout of my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy and the infrastructure for our Value Proposition is creating a lot of excitement around the world about the promise of Modern Selfcare and the new global mission of connecting with people in terms of their living standards, with a focus on incentivizing the drivers of Outcomes that will boost Economic Empowerment and Shared Prosperity – Health, Development, and Triumphant Living as a Culture. Lessons learned from my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy have pointed Shareholders and Stakeholders to the Unique Value of embedding Modern Selfcare Priorities across all Human Person and Human Services Frontiers. We believe that this excitement will boost investment across the global Private Sector landscape in the Modern Selfcare and Human Services Frontiers. We will need the Private Sector for this next phase. 

The Private Sector and Value Investors – Modern Selfcare including: Consumer Health and Development, Complementary and Integrative, Nutrition, Human Services, Agriculture, Value-Based and Integrated Care and Retail, now understand that in this new global Consumer and Household landscape with a permanent focus on Human and Patient Centricity – Health, Development, and Triumphant Living as a Culture, Modern Selfcare objectives will be a decision-making factor. As a result, aligning their operational strategy with the Modern Selfcare goals and embracing it as a key driver is a competitive necessity. CEOs, like Stakeholders and Shareholders understand that means embracing, embedding, and prioritising The Global Structure Network Limited and our Modern Selfcare History and Value Proposition into their Macroeconomic and Operational Strategy will deliver profitable and efficient Modern Selfcare Outcomes while creating business value.  https://theglobalstructurenetwork.com/how-to-engage-us

These benefits make the next phase of the buildout of my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, Efficacy, and our Modern Selfcare Value Proposition a competitive necessity for our stakeholders, shareholders, Consumers and Households. Although the policy groundwork prioritising Consumers and Households Health, Development, and Triumphant Living as a Culture has been laid, it will still be challenging to scale up and spread Modern Selfcare interventions that serve both those policy objectives and the operational benefit. Therefore, staying ahead is key for us. As we approach 2024, our focus remains sharp on identifying and capitalising on unique opportunities to deliver this next phase of our operational buildout and capacity to deliver more effectively and at scale across all our Modern Selfcare Products, Services, and Capital frontiers. 

By driving the development of the Modern Selfcare transition such as those sectors benefiting from the building out of this Global Social Infrastructure and the buildout of my more than 20 years of Healthy Structural Performance, Operational Resilience, and Efficacy supported by our Modern Selfcare Value Proposition, we can have a significant impact on the green transition, sustainability, and job creation. The new global Modern Selfcare and Consumer Health and Development market is significant and huge. According to Bloomberg news it is now worth $5.6 trillion, but research has shown that its true economic and social value is more than USD 30 trillion. At The Global Structure Network Limited www.theglobalstructurenetwork.com we are committed to using our capabilities and advantages to progress the global Modern Selfcare transition to support Resilient Consumers and Households – Health, Developments, and Triumphant Living as a Culture. I'm looking forward to hearing from our Investors, Value Investors, Publishers, and CEOs as we deliver the next phase of our Value Stack and the buildout of our Modern Selfcare Thesis. Serving Consumers and Households across the entire Human Services landscape.   https://theglobalstructurenetwork.com/how-to-engage-us

I would like to thank the researchers and policymakers from across industries and in towns and cities all over the world who have contributed to the great Modern Selfcare achievements. I'm looking forward to working with you in 2024 to continue the great work we have started to deliver for Resilient Consumers and Households through the strengthening of the existing Consumer and Household architecture. 

We did it! A toast to you: Champagne Wishes and Caviar Dreams!

Season's Greetings from The Global Structure Network Limited.

Gary

The Founder’s Gallery – Disease Prevention, Health Promotion, Cultural Transformation, and Quality Enhancement - (Global Freedom and Personal Health and Wellbeing Prosperity Policy Chair)  

Unrivalled Selfcare - Products, Services and Capital 

The People, Organizations’, and Brands we partner with will be visible on our sites under Impact Partners. 

https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-global-structure-network/

[b4nanaa]

KYS

What distinctive elements of radical Mao-era Chinese approaches to science appear in the image below? In the body of the paper, engage with THREE of the assigned readings from Unit 2 to explain how different authors portrayed this unusual period in the history of science.

The poster titled "Mountain Village Medical Station" presents us with the image of a young girl delivering flowers to two men as they discuss over a plant. The man on the left is dressed in fine, blue clothing and is holding a red book. Meanwhile the one on the right is dressed in more plain clothing and appears older, and is the one holding the flower. Based off of their body language and eyes, they seem to be discussing the plant with the one on the left mainly listening to the older one. Their surroundings seem to implying that what they might be discussing pertains to medicine, as supported by the caption.

Mountain Village Medical Station

THESIS DRAFT 1 (subject to change): On the surface it might not seem much, but on closer inspection, this image portrays elements distinct of the radical Mao-era and how it influenced science during that time. From just the image alone, I believe it represents the involvement of youth and women, and self reliance in China's science.

THESIS DRAFT 2 (subject to change): On the surface it might not seem much, but on closer inspection, this image portrays elements distinct of the radical Mao-era and how it influenced science during that time. From just the image alone, I believe it represents and is advertising for youth involvement in science, the 'opportunities' in learning from the countryside, and the ideals enforced by the state.

pochita being a baby :3

To begin, let's first start with the imagery of the girl. She appears younger than the men, possibly representing youth involvement which was prominent in the Mao-Era. Youth were encouraged to participate in science and was seen as vital to it. In Mao's words, “The young people are the most active and vital force in society. They are the most eager to learn and the least conservative in their thinking (Sigrid).” This gave youth a sense of importance, that it was up to them to take on the responsibility of leading the new society and destroying the old. The Red Guard is an example of this, mobilizing in 1966 and protesting against universities for being too bourgeois and catering to middle and capitalist classes, those who weren't in the working classes. Although this isn't the first time youth have gotten involved in politics or science as seen in the May Fourth movement, they were prominent in bringing the most change as seen in the cultural revolution.

Moving onto her surroundings and the name of the poster, I believe it takes place in the countryside. This perhaps touches upon urban and rural youth being sent to farmlands. The goal of sending them away was for them to learn from the peasants what the country was really about and what it meant to be a socialists. In the process, they'd also share what they've known in school such as their knowledge of science and technology to peasants. The emotions of this poster convey it as a happy and influential experience, however it's debatable if that's the case or not.

For some people, it was an inspiring experience that led them to appreciating peasants and their knowledge and way of living. Meanwhile, others had trouble adjusting to this no climate, especially since they had no family. Sigrid Schmalzer touches upon this in the section 'State Vision: Science as Opportunity' of her article youth and the 'Great revolutionary movement” of Scientific Experiment in 1960s–1970s rural China'.  In this passage, she touches upon the state's vision and approach for involving youth in agricultural science. The state was aiming for an agriculture experiment group with that the structure of "three in one". It required trained agricultural technicians, local cadres, and old peasants, which seems to represented in the image with the two men alongside the girl. One appears to be a cadre based off of his clothing and the red book in his hand, perhaps Mao's words, which was widely popular for followers at the time. Meanwhile the older man might be a peasant because of his plain clothing and off of the plant he's holding in his hand. But to continue, they weren't able to achieve this vision because of the lack of technicians to go on. Therefore, they shifted their focus onto youth. In order to draw youth to the country side, they presented it as a great scientific opportunity they were free to take. By learning alongside peasants, they would gain valuable knowledge from them.

Although there isn't much evidence of youth buying into this belief, there is plenty of them romanticizing science as a force of revolutionary heroism. Books, mostly illegal and underground ones, played a large part in inspiring youth. One particular novel was The Second Handshake by Zhang Yang. The plot follows the love story of two young scientists during the early decades of the twentieth century and through it, the book presents scientists as brave and patriotic. This largely resonated with young people and the author himself states the reason for writing the book was to inspire them. “Since I could not become a scientist myself, I used my pen to portray scientists, to represent them, to eulogize them so that my readers could under-stand them, respect them, and love them just as I did! (Sigrid)." It's also notable that he chose the scientist with the most prestigious scientific role to be a woman. Perhaps inspire young women to pursue science as well. The poster does the same thing; it could've represented a young man, but it portrayed a girl instead.

oh my god denji is so hot. im ngl, i would date him. LIKE LOOK AT HIM AAWOOOOOOOOGA????????? 😍😍😍

Furthering this, there's an abundant amount of successful accounts of urban youth settling in the country side and rural youth helping socialism in villages upon their happy returns home. However as Sigrid says, "should be read at least in part as an effort to convince educated youth to view scientific experiment as “a great opportunity (Sigrid)." It's important to realize while they might be evidence of how students experienced participating in this opportunities, we must keep in mind that they might not be true or an accurate representation of everyone's experience. Especially when most were hand selected for the state to advertise to the youth to the country.

One article from the 1969 magazine, China Reconstructs, is an example. The passage in question is Tempered in the Countryside and it's littered with inspirational stories portraying struggle, the support of peasants, and the opportunities to improve agriculture through science. Daring to Experiment shows this in particular, telling a story of a group of school graduates and their experiments. Led by Chou Chin-an, a rural youth who returned to his home village in the 1959, was in charge of planning the over all experiments. In this case, he organized a group to experiment with increasing the yield of wheat. "First they suggested breaking away from the old habit of watering wheat only when there is a drought and proposed watering it five times before the harvest. This provoked wide discussion in the commune. Some said, "Wheat is afraid of water, not drought." Others said, "In all my life I never heard of watering wheat!" Supported by the poor and lower-middle peasants, Chou Chin-an and his comrades followed Chairman Mao's teaching to "combine revolutionary sweep with practicalness" and made many experiments with watering wheat in their experimental plots. When the harvest arrived, their permu yield was more than twice the brigade's (Tempered in the Countryside, pg 38)." With the support and their learning from the peasants, their experiment ended up being a success.

However this caused the youth to become overcome with excitement and confidence, leading them to neglect the peasants knowledge. When they didn't, their experiments would be as successful. "The following season they applied too much nitrogenous fertilizer and water to the wheat in their experimental plots. It fell over and their harvest was low. Conservative villagers again began shaking their heads and making skeptical remarks (Tempered in the Countryside, pg 38)." Only when they listened to an experienced peasant's words were they able to succeed and produce a high yield after a year of hard work, highlighting the importance of the working classes' wisdom.

In the end, Chou Chin-an remarked on the experience, stating, "Success —failure — success, this process has made me understand more deeply Chairman Mao's teaching that 'intellectuals will accomplish nothing if they fail to integrate themselves with the workers and peasants'. The poor and lower-middle peasants will always be my teachers, I will strike deep roots in the countryside and be a peasant all the rest of my life." Reading this story, it's clear it's exemplifying and celebrating hard work, struggles, experiments, and most importantly, the support of the wise peasants. If not for the knowledge granted by the farmers, they wouldn't have been able to achieve such success. Even during failures like their attempt at fertilizers, they learned to overcome and learn from the experience to work towards their goals.

Another small detail is that she's delivering flowers to what is assumed to be a peasant, which might represent the ideology that science is meant to serve the people. This is one of the first principles embraced during the 1965 conference on youth in rural scientific experiments, which is that they are to the serve the revolution and people, not for fame or profit.

Once more the journal China Reconstructs provides us with a story, this one during 1971 and from a professor Tang Ao-Ching. While he isn't a youth, I feel as if it still represents this ideology. He speaks about his experience conducting experiments down at a chemical plant with the workers and how his mindset changes. It goes from being concerned about himself, to connecting with the workers and realizing he must serve the people, not himself.

In one case, he finds himself struggling with an experiment and is so wrapped up in it, he doesn't get eat or sleep. Instead of focusing on the technical side, the workers suggests that he should focus on the ideological side. Only when he stops and reflects, is he able to find the true issue. "Fame for myself, the center of my outlook on life, coiled around me like a poisonous snake. I had to destroy this bourgeois thinking with Mao Tsetung Thought, truly integrate with the workers, take the working class as my example, break away from self-interest, cultivate devotion to the public interest and make a fundamental change in my class ideology (How A Scientist Can Serve The People Better, pg 48)." It's only when he lets go of his old way of thinking and connects both his book knowledge with this new ideology by reaching out to the workers, is he able to solve his problem. Similar to the case in Daring to Experiment, it's only when he does this is he successful, with productivity being ten times higher.

In summary, the poster advertises for youth in science by demonstrating a young girl in the countryside and being surrounded by plants and a cadre learning from a peasant. The two men represent the opportunities found in being in the rural areas, that being the knowledge of the peasants. The girl being there promotes science to youth and for them to head for the countryside, while also demonstrating that science ideally should be serving the people and not themselves. All of this is supported by passages documenting the experience of scientists during the Mao era, but as Sigrid mentions, it's important to view this through a critical lens. While the poster might portray things in a positive manner, it doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate.

[merlions]

[This is a collection of really poorly organized thoughts so it's not meant to be like a thesis lol more like a series of bullet point thoughts, but in paragraph form lmfao]

Recently I saw some articles like "how one piece's message is confusing and keeps changing over time" and I keep chewing it up in my head but finally I think found words to express: one piece is only confusing if you miss the critical social commentary that a government seized total control and claim they're "good and righteous" and "keeping people safe" by controlling them and killing opposition, and entirely purge history to serve their own image ("the blank era"? Ok yeah I'll just take that as is and not ask any more questions. It's Normal to obliterate entire eras of history and if anyone researches it, they not only kill those guys but nuke the island, leaving no survivors. Normal!!!) And by villainizing a certain group of people, saying they're inherently evil for who they are and hunting them for sport, those people being hunted will understand they don't actually have to avoid committing crimes to stay alive. They're already being hunted like criminals just for existing and choosing to identify how they do, so might as well...be criminal

Like I know they literally have a revolutionary army in one piece but it still makes it seem more obvious, to me, if you change the term "pirates" to "anarchic/small tribe rebel groups". Luffy especially seems to use the term "pirate" as a metaphor, literally defining it as "freedom".

Also bc it recently occurred to me while watching ofmd that the definition of "pirate" is "someone who does crimes at sea". Which like... well that actually makes the question "who makes the laws" matter MORE than "can/should we stop those evil pirates from committing crimes?"