#i wanna see the characters that don’t exist in the current uk version would look like in that style

[montygatorguy]

ough i wanna see what the uk 2024 stex characters would look like in the bochum costume style so bad

[toshipingu]

Chevalier is not a shitty war strategist

I saw someone say Chevalier is a bad war strategist. It is time I avenge my unconventional husband.

DISCLAMER: THIS IS SIMPLIFIED HEADCANON. It is NOT entirely based off real events!

Note that the Ikemen Prince game is not focused on war strategy and that there is probably much more going on under the table. The game is a very romanticized view of life so I will try to make this a bit more believable.

I am modelling their relationship similar to Italy, UK, France + Germany in World War 2. It’s a bit more realistic compared to the ultimately simplified ass version in Ikeprince. (I have too much time on my hands today lol). But the map is almost the same just flipped about 90 degrees clockwise.

The technology is VERY demoted compared to in real life WW2. Read more for paragraphs of this...history war stuff I am oddly passionate about :D

Apologies for the bad English and unorganized text...I don’t wanna invest too much time into this. And this is just for fun; don’t take it seriously!!

** this is very simplified!!! The relationship is not exactly the same in real life. I meant the geography is slightly similar in MY rotated map. I’m writing about literal fictional characters so I’m altering the comparison to the 4 European countries as much as I want -- this is NOT canon :)

I thought it’d be easier for people to compare it to the game if the map was slightly similar to ours in real life. The ‘history’ is EXTREMELY simplified. I am comparing the CONFLICT between the countries and have still changed it up a bit i.e. The geographical ‘Italy’/Benitoite never siding with Germany/Obsidian when in reality there existed the Tripartite Pact with Japan as well in which I have omitted. There is no mention of specific historical details - I only took small chunks from history books and videos since it’s easier to explain!!!

I am NOT a historian. This is obviously simplified to the level of  the game’s flowery explanations. It’s basically CARTOONISH so take it with a  grain of salt 🤦‍♀️

 Chevalier’s War Strategy: To declare war on Obsidian.

Ignoring the existence of powerful countries similar to Japan, Russia, China and America, this war is simpler. I will be localizing the war at only this area.

1. Simplified descriptions of the countries:

Jade is a neutral UK without their naval fleet. 

Benitoite is an upgraded and allied version of Italy (Italians were cowards in war) +  naval fleet. 

Rhodolite is a smaller France. 

Obsidian is an agriculturally poor Germany. Just a military-rich but people-poor country if that makes sense.

Take into account that a powerful country should also have a prospering population, not just fancy war weapons.

Benitoite and Jade are neutral.

Also, war is not a beautiful thing. And men back then were merciless as hecc.

2. Situation

Here Obsidian has no allies whereas in WW2 Italy was a (bad) ally to Germany.

The country/countries Obsidian is currently trying to colonize is similar to Poland (a small and poorly equipped country at the time.)

There is a naturally impenetrable ‘border’ between Rhodolite, Benitioite and Obsidian. This is incredibly convenient for Rhodolite and Bentioite.

3. Likely scenario

Looking at the map the first thing that comes to mind is: Why don’t Jade and Obsidian just take over Rhodolite and (maybe) Benitoite (totally possible)?

You will see that Jade is a very important piece of the puzzle here.

--> Jade is a neutral country which can not be threatened or attacked under the law of war. But Jade can still choose who to side with if they want. It would benefit Obsidian greatly if they sided with Jade so they have 2 borders to penetrate through instead of the half mountain covered border between Rhodolite and Obsidian.

--> Obsidian can ‘ask’ Jade to join forces with them, or Obsidian can try to force Jade to side with them. Declaring war or attacking Jade is a big NONO idea because it would automatically lead to international action against Obsidian for attacking a neutral country - here, Obsidian's power can't oppose international war backlash. Furthermore, severing trade relations with Jade is catastrophic for the not-so-prosperous Obsidian. IDK what other countries Obsidian is trading with but it’s probably not as important as trade with Jade. I assume Obsidian also steals from other countries they conquered so keep in mind that they are still incredibly powerful.

--> ‘Asking’ Jade to join forces is a risk. Obsidian has no way of really knowing whether or not Jade would agree to this unless Obsidian causes or if there exists some (staged) bitterness between Jade and Rhodolite - unlikely as Obsidian is still trying to colonize other countries - and Rhodolite seems pretty chill with Jade.

Chevalier is correct: currently, it is the perfect time to declare war on Obsidian

--> Obsidian is currently, actively trying to colonize Rhodolite. It is inappropriate of Rhodolite to just sit there. Chevalier will have to act quickly before Obsidians ‘centuries ahead technology’ actually gets on the battlefield (still currently fighting with swords...machinery under development). Also note that Obsidian would probably be relatively exhausted (i.e. resources used) from battling another war with the so called small country

This is the best time for Rhodolite to fight back before Obsidian becomes more powerful.

--> Assuming that Obsidian is the only colonizing power of the 4, colonizers would look very BAD in this situation. Obsidian is basically a war bully, and EVERY surrounding country (not just Rhodolite) is under their threat, including Jade. Yes I know it’s against the laws of war to attack a neutral country but keep in mind that Obsidian is the only colonizer here. Colonizers conquer and exploit .

4. Antiwar faction and unstable government

--> Anti-war faction: Target Chevalier’s faction only. A small part of the (indecisive, rich and selfish) population as we have seen in Chevalier’s route. They are scared but they still mostly understand Chevalier’s motives. I was really confused when they wanted Rhodolite to quite literally surrender to Obsidian. Giving yourself to a colonizing country is not stopping war...but letting them exploit your land, resources, people etc. The princes were not talking gibberish when they said that letting Obsidian in would turn the citizens of Rhodolite into slaves.

5. No King??

--> By the time the Belle selection is over, Obsidian would probably be done with their colonizing up there, but it is possible that they could still be preoccupied.

Note that Obsidian used up resources to fight that particular war and should be relatively exhausted (requiring time to recover)

Having no King doesn’t seem like a big problem on the surface -- because it probably isn’t really in Rhodolite. The king is forma power and the final military decision should be made by him-- if Chevalier becomes King this becomes straightforward. 

BUT, say no king has been chosen yet and Rhodolite is on thin-ice with Obsidian. The decision sits with the princes and (maybe Sariel sorta). 

Keeping the dead King secret is possible if Sariel does his magical demon silencing shit. I think it is very likely that Leon’s faction would listen to Chevalier -- because realistically speaking, a country must take defense AND offense against a colonizer. Leon’s ideology of being defensive only will not work. It would only corner them.

I’m not going to expand on this point because it’s so freaking complicated. Dead King does not mean dead millitary tho.

6. Declaring war

--> Obsidian declaring full-ass war on Rhodolite is not a good idea especially if Jade still has great relationship with Rhodolite.

In this instance, to allow development and safety of Jade itself, it’s very likely that Jade would side with Rhodolite to keep trades up with rich countries like Benitoite (which is Rhodolite’s ally) and Rhodolite itself, instead of siding with an exploiting conquerer with poor land and bad primary resources like Obsidian. But I still assume Obsidian has other types of resources i.e. coal and fossil fuels that would come into great use during the industrial revolution.

--> Rhodolite, Benitoite and (very likely) Jade declaring war on Obsidian: Forcing Obsidian into submission is still a full fledged war, and it is likely that Rhodolite would be able to persuade Jade into allying with them. 3 good millitary forces vs 1 great advanced colonizer. Forcing Obsidian into submission means they three countries could also take advantage of Obsidian's existing natural resources, military supplies and advanced technologies to develop themselves. 

Note that I assume all countries have relatively similar war tactics and intellegence and strategy.

7. conclusion

Declaring war on Obsidian isn’t a terrible idea. 

And we could see that Chevalier lowkey is pretty unmoved about casualties (on the surface) if it means protecting Rhodolite.

Chevalier’s war strategy isn’t bad (I guess).

//

(Mass casualties for all choices)

If you read until here, you’re nuts but thanks. I am relieved to get this 20 minute rant off of my chest.

Sorry for the bad English and disorganization 

[slightlyburnedpopcorn]

This is going to be a little bit of a different post than I usually do because usually on my blog I just reblog shit but. I don’t care. This is gonna be a long one boys so buckle up.

Disclaimer: George Orwell was homophobic as fuck and my intention is in no way to glorify him. 1984 is a work I care a lot about, but I am not ignoring the problematic aspects of the author and his work. I still think the book has a lot of valid points around using language to manipulate people and censorship, and this is just a really long rant I wrote at one in the morning after one too many arguments with someone about the book.

Thanks, 

Your local angry bisexual who keeps burning her popcorn

If I see someone throw 1984 to cry censorship because they don’t want some racist statue removed from public areas, or because history textbooks are recontextualizing how terrible imperialism is, or some shit like that, I will eat the entire novel. Because maybe then I can somehow find a way to communicate the use of censorship in the book that will get through people’s skulls.

1984 is not just about censorship. Yes, there is the concept of constant surveillance, but that is its own beast to tackle. And it’s not necessary to discuss in this essay-turned-rant (but I encourage you to read about it and draw your own conclusions). It is about the manipulation of language and media to effectively brainwash the population into a constant state of cognitive dissonance (aka doublethink, or holding two contradictory beliefs simultaneously), especially when said population is in a particularly vulnerable place. 

Literally one of the main concepts of the book is newspeak, a language devised specifically to be as “efficient” as possible by simplifying grammar and restricting vocabulary down to the bare minimum needed to communicate. This is a direct way to control the thoughts of the people. If you are feeling “rebellious” or “oppressed”, how on earth are you able to communicate those feelings without the words to do so? Yeah, you can say it exists because you are obviously experience it, but how do you tell other people? And if you can’t tell other people, does it exist? It’s basically linguistic gaslighting! While newspeak is a very extreme form of mass mind control, more insidious versions of this concept can be seen in modern media. What sounds worse: civilian casualties or collateral damage? What is the goal of the news outlets who use those phrases?

I’m gonna use two headlines as an example: First is from Fox News, second is from NY Times.

I am not going to get into the content of the article, I am going to focus on the language used in the headline alone. IMMEDIATELY, Fox News is purposely using inflammatory language in order to incite outrage in the reader. By saying that leadership is needed after a fatal shooting, it creates a picture in the reader already that CHOP zone is a dangerous and unregulated area that needs tighter restrictions. Just using CHOP alone without explaining what it creates the feeling of violence thanks to the subtext of the actual word “chop”. Meanwhile, the NYTimes article uses more neutral-sounding language, describing what happened in Seattle’s autonomous zone like how a high schooler would write an academic paper. The headline is sterile but still effectively communicates what is describing.

Why am I explaining these differences? Because these headlines are describing the same story.

Changing the language in a piece changes the emotional reaction to it. Who are you more likely to be enraged at when you finish reading that article? What is the motivation of the new source when they write it like that?

Look I picked Fox News and NYTimes because it is the easiest and most obvious way to show this concept. Why did I bother to do that? Because these tactics don’t need to be on such an extreme scale to be an issue (even if I think that they currently are on an extreme enough scale). Strategies like these can be used to trick the public in a turbulent state into believing the most extreme beliefs that otherwise would have been considered nonsense.

On a related note, you wanna know something about Ingsoc, the totalitarian regime in 1984?

The people fucking voted it in. The population of England in the novel willingly gave up their rights because they fell for these specific tactics in a time of instability because they felt like it was a better option. They thought they would end up in a better place. They were tricked into a dictatorship by having their information manipulated by those in power who controlled it. The entire point of this is to show how any country could fall into a trap like this (If you want an example of the US Government manipulating information to trick the public besides Cold War propaganda, look into COINTELPRO).

Now after explaining the central concept in the novel, you can see why using this book as a defense against the removing statues of Confederate soldiers, as if it will lead to the removal of all monuments, is fucking stupid. Do you want to know why people use this book as a defense? Because Winston’s (the main character’s) job is to rewrite history to suit the needs of the government. They are taking the literal surface-level analysis and applying it to a situation that it does not at all apply to. Why doesn’t it apply? Winston’s job is not only to rewrite history but to literally wipe any evidence of any events ever happening that contradicts Ingsoc’s belief.

Without having to explain the actual in-universe plot, that’s like if in the middle of the Cold War the United States suddenly decided to tell the entire population that they are not fighting against Communism and the Soviet Union, but against the United Kingdom and capitalism. Meanwhile, they are also telling the population that the United States has been communist the whole time, and that their enemies have always been the United Kingdom and capitalism. And then Winston has to remove any evidence that contradicts the now-communist US’s war with the UK and capitalism.

Rewriting history and recontextualizing people and events is not censorship. In fact, it should be done whenever possible as more information and differing perspectives are made more accessible.

What is censorship? Preventing this information to be brought to light. What is the easiest way to control people? To keep them uninformed.

Removing monuments, renaming locations, any form of recontextualization is not the same thing as destroying any evidence of an alternative narrative.

And if you were taught to believe otherwise, then you need to question the motivation of the people in power who decided that it should be interpreted this way.

Because they are the real-world big brother.

And if you are focusing on the surface-level narrative of censoring historical information and not the greater context of what is being actually being censored and how, then you are falling in the exact same trap that 1984 describes.

TLDR: Stop using 1984 as a defense for censorship without understanding 1.) what is actually censorship and 2.) the specific and insidious form of censorship used in the novel and how people in power in our own country use this in current times. Throwing the novel around as if something like removing Confederate soldier statues from public parks is at all akin to censorship but ignoring how news media and politicians manipulate language to control public thought is exactly what big brother wants.

This is probably nothing new! This is probably repetitive! I don’t care, because this is an actual argument I constantly have with people!

Further info below the cut because this is long enough as is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe64p-QzhNE Ted Ed on the term “Orwellian”

https://www.wired.com/story/gone-with-the-wind-hbo-max/ Why HBO Max removing Gone With The Wind temporarily in order to add content warnings for its racist depictions is not censorship

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship Wikipedia article on censorship

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/censorship American Library Association Explanation and Resource Guide on the First Amendment

https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1347&context=senproj_s2018 A long but informative paper on monuments, their role, and a comparison between the US and South Africa’s debates on their removal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO Wikipedia article on COINTELPRO that is a really good example of the government manipulating public thought

[midnightiscoming-kasabian]

How Batman inspired Kasabian side project 

By Paul Glynn 9 June 2019

As 21st Century rock 'n' roll names go, they don't come much bigger in the UK than Serge Pizzorno.

Over the past 15 years his tub-thumping band Kasabian have been selling out stadiums and headlining festivals like Glastonbury.

The guitarist/singer's name has also been synonymous with wonder goals at Soccer Aid and on Soccer Am.

For his first foray into the solo world, however, Pizzorno felt his given birth name in full just "didn't feel right", so while his band are taking a year off, he's now operating alone under the new moniker The S.L.P. [Sergio Lorenzo Pizzorno].

"It almost felt like it would be good if I was starting a new fashion line," laughs Pizzorno, "like Georgio Armani or something".

He added: "I thought the initials would be a better place to start.

"I also like Biggie Smalls, the B.I.G. - you know what I mean? The S.L.P. - I was into that."

"The dot after the P is very important if you're gonna write it," he stresses.

There's more to the re-name than meets the eye though, it seems. 

As well as being a nod to a famous late rapper, Pizzorno claims his latest incarnation allows him the chance to free himself from the shackles of his day job - running a massive dance-rock "machine" - and to explore a different side his personality, with a whole new short-haired look to boot.

Much like his favourite superhero.

"There's three songs on the record called Meanwhile..." he explains, "Meanwhile in Genoa, Meanwhile... The Welcome Break... and Meanwhile… In the Silent Nowhere - that's the start middle and end of the album.

"I've always loved that, he's Bruce Wayne, meanwhile... he's Batman, in the Batcave!

"In everyday life he's got his suit on and behind what we don't see is that he's this thing, this alter ego.

"So I just thought you've got 'Serge', whatever that means, and meanwhile there's The S.L.P."

He adds: "It felt like OK, I've got a starting point and for me making music, I need a start point, I need a reason to do it.

"I'm not doing it to knock out cheese burgers and make profit, I'm into it to blow my own mind."

Pizzorno debuted tracks from his forthcoming debut solo album at a central London Q & A, alongside his friend, comedian and sometimes collaborator Noel Fielding.

One of Fielding's own alter egos - aside from baking cakes and cooking up surreal comedy - is portraying Vlad the Impaler, a character from one of Pizzorno's band's songs, at some live shows.

Fielding described his friend as "one of the best songwriters we've got," adding, "we should celebrate him."

'Self portrait'

The 38-year-old musician from Leicester views the record as "an updated self-portrait" and a chance to take stock of who he really is, where he's been and where he's headed.

His band have had five consecutive UK number one albums, with Pizzorno acting as the main songwriter and creative force.

"You get so far doing it and you just forget," he says, sipping a suitably rock 'n' roll-named cocktail - Crossfire Hurricane.

"You go 'oh that's what I do now', and some mornings you wake up and go 'I don't know if I wanna do that anymore'. Everyone does it, you do it.

"It's that thing of going 'man, remember when it wasn't about that?'

"So now I can ask whatever I want, I can go into a studio and don't have to think about headlining a festival, or getting it on the radio or all the things that creep in.

"There's a freedom to it, it can be whatever it wants to be and that is exciting."

The first thing "it" became was a collaboration, (thanks to a mutual friend) with one of the hottest rappers in the UK, Little Simz, on lead single Favourites.

The genre-bending track, which was Annie Mac's Hottest Record on Radio 1 earlier this year, tackles a subject that barely existed when Kasabian began - the stress of online mobile phone dating apps.

"I was sat in a boozer with my wife," he recalls, "and we saw these girls flicking through, going 'he's my favourite,' and I was like 'I'm writing that down, I love that.'

"It just got me thinking about the real you. What we put out to the world, especially online, is a heightened vision of yourself and the perfect version of you, but the reality is we're all sat at home panicking like hell about everything!

"I needed someone to buzz off and Simz, she's the best. So I sent her the track on email and told her what it was about and she loved it.

"It's this back and forth between this couple on a date and in their heads this voice is screaming out 'if you only knew the real me!' but then they can't give that away.

"She came down to the studio, we sat down and she penned it on an iPhone."

The re-branded Pizzorno is currently putting together a band for some Dave Byrne/Talking Heads-inspired theatrical live dates, which he promises will also include some more intimate solo moments.

"I don't want it to be like Kasabian" declares Pizzorno, who adds that his record - sonically speaking - goes "from Ibiza to Nigeria to... I dunno... Croydon".

And as he begins his musical metamorphosis into his own version of Batman, he does so with the full blessing of the man who has been his Robin for all these years (or vice versa) - Kasabian singer, Tom Meighan  

"Tom? He loves it. He's my favourite bro!"

Sergio Pizzorno's debut solo album The S.L.P. is out later this year

Source: www.bbc.com | Photo: Carsten Windhorst