#its against the rules of the treaty | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

withbriefthanksgiving · 1 year ago

Text

The director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the UN (UN OHCHR), Craig Mokhiber, has resigned in a letter dated 28 October 2023

the resignation letter can be found embedded in this tweet by Rami Atari (@.Raminho) dated 31 October 2023.

The letters are here:

Transcription:

United Nations | Nations Unies

HEADQUARTERS I SIEGE I NEW YORK, NY 10017

28 October 2023

Dear High Commissioner,

This will be my last official communication to you as Director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

I write at a moment of great anguish for the world, including for many of our colleagues. Once again, we are seeing a genocide unfolding before our eyes, and the Organization that we serve appears powerless to stop it. As someone who has investigated human rights in Palestine since the 1980s, lived in Gaza as a UN human rights advisor in the 1990s, and carried out several human rights missions to the country before and since, this is deeply personal to me.

I also worked in these halls through the genocides against the Tutsis, Bosnian Muslims, the Yazidi, and the Rohingya. In each case, when the dust settled on the horrors that had been perpetrated against defenseless civilian populations, it became painfully clear that we had failed in our duty to meet the imperatives of prevention of mass atrocites, of protection of the vulnerable, and of accountability for perpetrators. And so it has been with successive waves of murder and persecution against the Palestinians throughout the entire life of the UN.

High Commissioner, we are failing again.

As a human rights lawyer with more than three decades of experience in the field, I know well that the concept of genocide has often been subject to political abuse. But the current wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian people, rooted in an ethno-nationalist settler colonial ideology, in continuation of decades of their systematic persecution and purging, based entirely upon their status as Arabs, and coupled with explicit statements of intent by leaders in the Israeli government and military, leaves no room for doubt or debate. In Gaza, civilian homes, schools, churches, mosques, and medical institutions are wantonly attacked as thousands of civilians are massacred. In the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, homes are seized and reassigned based entirely on race, and violent settler pogroms are accompanied by Israeli military units. Across the land, Apartheid rules.

This is a text-book case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What's more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations "to ensure respect" for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel's atrocities.

Volker Turk, High Commissioner for Human Rights Palais Wilson, Geneva

In concert with this, western corporate media, increasingly captured and state-adjacent, are in open breach of Article 20 of the ICCPR, continuously dehumanizing Palestinians to facilitate the genocide, and broadcasting propaganda for war and advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility, and violence. US-based social media companies are suppressing the voices of human rights defenders while amplifying pro-Israel propaganda. Israel lobby online-trolls and GONGOS are harassing and smearing human rights defenders, and western universities and employers are collaborating with them to punish those who dare to speak out against the atrocities. In the wake of this genocide, there must be an accounting for these actors as well, just as there was for radio Mules Collins in Rwanda.

In such circumstances, the demands on our organization for principled and effective action are greater than ever. But we phave not met the challenge. The protective enforcement power Security Council has again been blocked by US intransigence, the SG [UN Secretary General] is under assault for the mildest of protestations, and our human rights mechanisms are under sustained slanderous attack by an organized, online impunity network.

Decades of distraction by the illusory and largely disingenuous promises of Oslo have diverted the Organization from its core duty to defend international law, international human rights, and the Charter itself. The mantra of the "two-state solution" has become an open joke in the corridors of the UN, both for its utter impossibility in fact, and for its total failure to account for the inalienable human rights of the Palestinian people. The so-called "Quartet" has become nothing more than a fig leaf for inaction and for subservience to a brutal status quo. The (US-scripted) deference to "agreements between the parties themselves" (in place of international law) was always a transparent slight-of-hand, designed to reinforce the power of Israel over the rights of the occupied and dispossessed Palestinians.

High Commissioner, I came to this Organization first in the 1980s, because I found in it a principled, norm-based institution that was squarely on the side of human rights, including in cases where the powerful US, UK, and Europe were not on our side. While my own government, its subsidiarity institutions, and much of the US media were still supporting or justifying South African apartheid, Israeli oppression, and Central American death squads, the UN was standing up for the oppressed peoples of those lands. We had international law on our side. We had human rights on our side. We had principle on our side. Our authority was rooted in our integrity. But no more.

In recent decades, key parts of the UN have surrendered to the power of the US, and to fear of the Israel Lobby, to abandon these principles, and to retreat from international law itself. We have lost a lot in this abandonment, not least our own global credibility. But the Palestinian people have sustained the biggest losses as a result of our failures. It is a stunning historic irony that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in the same year that the Nakba was perpetrated against the Palestinian people. As we commemorate the 75th Anniversary of the UDHR, we would do well to abandon the old cliché that the UDHR was born out of the atrocities that proceeded it, and to admit that it was born alongside one of the most atrocious genocides of the 20th Century, that of the destruction of Palestine. In some sense, the framers were promising human rights to everyone, except the Palestinian people. And let us remember as well, that the UN itself carries the original sin of helping to facilitate the dispossession of the Palestinian people by ratifying the European settler colonial project that seized Palestinian land and turned it over to the colonists. We have much for which to atone.

But the path to atonement is clear. We have much to learn from the principled stance taken in cities around the world in recent days, as masses of people stand up against the genocide, even at risk of beatings and arrest. Palestinians and their allies, human rights defenders of every stripe, Christian and Muslim organizations, and progressive Jewish voices saying "not in our name", are all leading the way. All we have to do is to follow them.

Yesterday, just a few blocks from here, New York's Grand Central Station was completely taken over by thousands of Jewish human rights defenders standing in solidarity with the Palestinian people and demanding an end to Israeli tyranny (many risking arrest, in the process). In doing so, they stripped away in an instant the Israeli hasbara propaganda point (and old antisemitic trope) that Israel somehow represents the Jewish people. It does not. And, as such, Israel is solely responsible for its crimes. On this point, it bears repeating, in spite of Israel lobby smears to the contrary, that criticism of Israel's human rights violations is not antisemitic, any more than criticism of Saudi violations is Islamophobic, criticism of Myanmar violations is anti-Buddhist, or criticism of Indian violations is anti-Hindu. When they seek to silence us with smears, we must raise our voice, not lower it. I trust you will agree, High Commissioner, that this is what speaking truth to power is all about.

But I also find hope in those parts of the UN that have refused to compromise the Organization's human rights principles in spite of enormous pressures to do so. Our independent special rapporteurs, commissions of enquiry, and treaty body experts, alongside most of our staff, have continued to stand up for the human rights of the Palestinian people, even as other parts of the UN (even at the highest levels) have shamefully bowed their heads to power. As the custodians of the human rights norms and standards, OHCHR. has a particular duty to defend those standards. Our job, I believe, is to make our voice heard, from the Secretary-General to the newest UN recruit, and horizontally across the wider UN system, incisting that the human rights of the Palestinian people are not up for debate, negotiation, or compromise anywhere under the blue flag.

What, then, would a UN-norm-based position look like? For what would we work if we were true to our rhetorical admonitions about human rights and equality for all, accountability for perpetrators, redress for victims, protection of the vulnerable, and empowerment for rights-holders, all under the rule of law? The answer, I believe, is simple—if we have the clarity to see beyond the propagandistic smokescreens that distort the vision of justice to which we are sworn, the courage to abandon fear and deference to powerful states, and the will to truly take up the banner of human rights and peace. To be sure, this is a long-term project and a steep climb. But we must begin now or surrender to unspeakable horror. I see ten essential points:

Legitimate action: First, we in the UN must abandon the failed (and largely disingenuous) Oslo paradigm, its illusory two-state solution, its impotent and complicit Quartet, and its subjugation of international law to the dictates of presumed political expediency. Our positions must be unapologetically based on international human rights and international law.

Clarity of Vision: We must stop the pretense that this is simply a conflict over land or religion between two warring parties and admit the reality of the situation in which a disproportionately powerful state is colonizing, persecuting, and dispossessing an indigenous population on the basis of their ethnicity.

One State based on human rights: We must support the establishment of a single, democratic, secular state in all of historic Palestine, with equal rights for Christians, Muslims, and Jews, and, therefore, the dicmantling of the deeply racist, settler-colonial project and an end to apartheid across the land.

Fighting Apartheid: We must redirect all UN efforts and resources to the struggle against apartheid, just as we did for South Africa in the 1970s, 80s, and early 90s.

Return and Compensation: We must reaffirm and insist on the right to return and full compensation for all Palestinians and their families currently living in the occupied territories, in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and in the diaspora across the globe.

Truth and Justice: We must call for a transitional justice process, making full use of decades of accumulated UN investigations, enquiries, and reports, to document the truth, and to ensure accountability for all perpetrators, redress for all victims, and remedies for documented injustices.

Protection: We must press for the deployment of a well-resourced and strongly mandated UN protection force with a sustained mandate to protect civilians from the river to the sea.

Disarmament: We must advocate for the removal and destruction of Israel's massive stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, lest the conflict lead to the total destruction of the region and, possibly, beyond.

Mediation: We must recognize that the US and other western powers are in fact not credible mediators, but rather actual parties to the conflict who are complicit with Israel in the violation of Palestinian rights, and we must engage them as such.

Solidarity: We must open our doors (and the doors of the SG) wide to the legions of Palestinian, Israeli, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian human rights defenders who are standing in solidarity with the people of Palestine and their human rights and stop the unconstrained flow of Israel lobbyists to the offices of UN leaders, where they advocate for continued war, persecution, apartheid, and impunity, and smear our human rights defenders for their principled defense of Palestinian rights.

This will take years to achieve, and western powers will fight us every step of the way, so we must be steadfast. In the immediate term, we must work for an immediate ceasefire and an end to the longstanding siege on Gaza, stand up against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, Jerusalem, and the West Bank (and elsewhere), document the genocidal assault in Gaza, help to bring massive humanitarian aid and reconstruction to the Palestinians, take care of our traumatized colleagues and their families, and fight like hell for a principled approach in the UN's political offices.

The UN's failure in Palestine thus far is not a reason for us to withdraw. Rather it should give us the courage to abandon the failed paradigm of the past, and fully embrace a more principled course. Let us, as OHCHR, boldly and proudly join the anti-apartheid movement that is growing all around the world, adding our logo to the banner of equality and human rights for the Palestinian people. The world is watching. We will all be accountable for where we stood at this crucial moment in history. Let us stand on the side of justice.

I thank you, High Commissioner, Volker, for hearing this final appeal from my desk. I will leave the Office in a few days for the last time, after more than three decades of service. But please do not hesitate to reach out if I can be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,

Craig Mokhiber

End of transcription.

Emphasis (bolding) is my own. I have added links, where relevant, to explanations of concepts the former Director refers to.

#Israel #Palestine #October 2023 #28 October 2023 #United Nations #Described #Long post #I’ll add more links to the things he is talking about later

15K notes · View notes

fading-event-608 · 3 months ago

Text

Recently the syndicate of chemists in Lebanon has issued a statement warning people to not go near the blast sites due to alleged use of depleted uranium by Israel. (link - you need to scroll till the statement in Arabic). The screenshot of their statement on twitter was shared here on Tumblr and I’ve seen multiple people expressing scepticism regarding the source. Some people linked an article (link) from anti-Hezbollah 'democratic' newspaper 'L’Orient Today' to ‘fact-check’ - because of course they can’t read Arabic and are discontent with a twitter link.

This is my short summary of the article: they confirm that Israel has used Depleted Uranium (DU) weapons, not only in Lebanon but also in Gaza in June of this year and between October and December of last year. They establish a history of the use of Depleted Uranium, and include examples of its use in Iran in 2003. Israel doesn't directly talk about their use of DU, but neither are they hiding it - because there is no law that forbids the use of these bombs by Israel, there is no treaty regulating the use of DU weapons. There were several resolutions calling for a moratorium on the use of DU weapons in the UN and EU Parliament, the latest of which was in 2022, but these have failed to stop their use (those who have used them also includes both Russia and Ukraine). The article ends with an ominous addition that the Israeli army has been found guilty multiple times of using white phosphorus, which IS prohibited against civilians or civilian property under international law. (You probably can already tell that their defense is that they do not use it against civilians)

There is another article that was published in early September this year - LINK - I highly encourage you to read this one yourself, as it is quite short, especially when considering the amount of information it contains. As this one is more easily accessible, I won’t summarize it - please take it in yourself. I will say, however, that this article’s author, one Dr. Busby, worked with colleagues to conduct several investigations into the use of uranium-based weapons in both Lebanon and Gaza. In 2006, Dr. Busby asked his colleague to collect multiple samples from a crater left by what was suspected to be Depleted Uranium weapons. Samples from an ambulance air filter were also taken. Dr. Busby and company found not only the presence of depleted uranium but also of Enriched Uranium. Here’s the paper: link.

Enriched Uranium. In 2006.

By 2024, all of the laboratories that Dr. Busby had used to Conduct the investigation have closed their doors either to him or in general. Busby’s letters to the UN, as well as papers detailing evidence of the use of enriched and depleted uranium are either dismissed or ignored, rendering it unlikely that there will ever be the “official” source for these claims that certain people now see fit to demand. And even if the UN did accept those letters and did push for ban of those weapons - would Israel comply? Genocide is ‘illegal’ under international law, and Israel still faces the case in ICJ, but what will that ICJ do if they rule that Israel is guilty? What would UN do if they accept evidence of Israel using uranium-based weapons? Scold them and write a fine?

The aspect of the deployment of nuclear weapons considered the most horrific is - and has always been - the fallout. The idea that all nuclear weapons would leave evidence - again, fallout - behind was born into the cultural consciousness through various cold war era PSAs, as well as other media inspired by these horrors, potential and otherwise. The weapons Israel is using here do not create fallout, however. But do not mistake them as harmless - they are still highly carcinogenic. They cause birth defects, as well as various other illnesses - mysterious illnesses, or at least mysterious until doctors attempting to treat them register that their patients have been exposed to enriched uranium, after which point the mystery goes away.

In a sense, the horrors advertised by cold war PSAs and films like Doctor Strangelove, the promise of some explosive end brought about by some fool in the US pushing the wrong button - these serve to draw a veil over the continued use of nuclear weapons that have been ongoing since this technology was first harnessed for violence. This is a severe danger to the people of Gaza, and we can’t ignore it simply because we have developed in our minds too much faith in the loosest understandings of nuclear warfare.

I think many of you are familiar with a boiling frog story. The story goes that if you put a frog in a pot of boiling water, it will try to climb out. But if you put it in warm water and very slowly heat it, it will be so accustomed to the temperature it will eventually be boiled alive. It’s not very authentic, of course - in reality the frog will try to jump out as soon as it deems the water temperature uncomfortable. Just like you would try to get out of the bathtub as soon as it gets too hot for you or try to warm yourself up when you spend too much time outside in winter.

But some of it still rings true. At what point will the UN, or ICJ, or some other white savior wannabe decide that Israel has done too much? What is that ‘too-much’ point that makes them try to protest, and what would that protest be?

As in case with Tumblr, it seems that the boiling point, in fact, has already passed and people grew accustomed to deaths of Palestinians. There are thousands of posts about the situation in Gaza, and the whole Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, Syria… They get a lot of attention by both zionists and Palestine supporters. There are also hundreds of Gazans that came to Tumblr in hopes to escape the genocide by asking people to cover evacuation and survival costs. Do they get the same attention? Barely. Arguably zionists are more invested in interacting with those posts - they mass report them and harass Palestinians. And even if the fundraiser post gets a lot of attention, it does not necessarily translate into a lot of donations - people just assume that someone else will donate instead of them.

You can’t stop Israel all by yourself. You can’t convince the UN or try to progress the ICJ case by yourself. You can, however, do small acts that will contribute to Palestinian resistance. Go protest, go boycott, and please, please, please, go donate to Palestinian fundraisers.

Falastin’s family are under constant threat in Gaza. She’s been fundraising to save them since late June, and yet they’ve only recently gotten to just over 5% of their total goal - a little short of $10,000 USD. They’re still in Gaza, and still in need of funds for survival. The longer they are trapped there, the more they need - not just for food and water, but also for medicine, shelter, and clothes. Each time they’re displaced, due to inadequate time to pack, they lose more supplies, and their needs increase. Give what you can so that they can survive this, and please share their fundraiser as much as you’re able regardless of whether you can donate, just in case someone you know might be able to help. Not just here on Tumblr, on other social media, talk to your friends, coworkers, family, in group chats and in discord servers.

Please keep in mind conversion rates before donating:

10$ = 103 SEK

25$ = 260 SEK

50$ = 519 SEK

100$ = 1,038 SEK

#free palestine #falastin

3K notes · View notes

albertserra · 1 year ago

Text

Dear High Commissioner,

This will be my last official communication to you as Director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

High Commissioner, we are failing again.

This is a textbook case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What's more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations "to ensure respect" for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel's atrocities.

Volker Turk, High Commissioner for Human Rights Palais Wilson, Geneva

Full letter

2K notes · View notes

storiesfromgaza · 1 year ago

Text

You MUST READ and disseminate the resignation letter of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which speaks of a comprehensive plan for annihilation/genocide.

This resignation letter and message were written three days before the Jabaliya Massacre, in which many children and women tragically lost their lives!

You can read it from the image, or I will provide you with the text below to make it easier for you to read.

28 October 2023 Dear High Commissioner, This will be my last official communication to you as Director of the New York Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. I write at a moment of great anguish for the world, including for many of our colleagues. Once again, we are seeing a genocide unfolding before our eyes, and the Organization that we serve appears powerless to stop it. As someone who has investigated human rights in Palestine since the 1980s, lived in Gaza as a UN human rights advisor in the 1990s, and carried out several human rights missions to the country before and since, this is deeply personal to me. I also worked in these halls through the genocides against the Tutsis, Bosnian Muslims, the Yazidi, and the Rohingya. In each case, when the dust settled on the horrors that had been perpetrated against defenseless civilian populations, it became painfully clear that we had failed in our duty to meet the imperatives of prevention of mass atrocites, of protection of the vulnerable, and of accountability for perpetrators. And so it has been with successive waves of murder and persecution against the Palestinians throughout the entire life of the UN. High Commissioner, we are failing again. As a human rights lawyer with more than three decades of experience in the field, I know well that the concept of genocide has often been subject to political abuse. But the current wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian people, rooted in an ethno-nationalist settler colonial ideology, in continuation of decades of their systematic persecution and purging, based entirely upon their status as Arabs, and coupled with explicit statements of intent by leaders in the Israeli government and military, leaves no room for doubt or debate. In Gaza, civilian homes, schools, churches, mosques, and medical institutions are wantonly attacked as thousands of civilians are massacred. In the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, homes are seized and reassigned based entirely on race, and violent settler pogroms are accompanied by Israeli military units. Across the land, Apartheid rules. This is a text-book case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What's more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations to ensure respect" for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel's atrocities. Volker Turk, High Commissioner for Human Rights Palais Wilson, Geneva

#gaza #palestine #gaza strip #free gaza #free palestine #storiesfromgaza #غزة #فلسطين #genocide #humanitarian crisis

1K notes · View notes

robot-roadtrip-rants · 3 months ago

Text

I posted an analysis of a section from Dark Imperium on Reddit that I'm quite proud of, so I'm reposting it here:

‘Some of the worlds dispute the proof. They are more than glad to welcome our warriors, but the Imperial governors in two dozen systems quibble over reaffirming their oaths of loyalty. In one case, we have had an outbreak of intra-system civil war over the issue, where one lord has declared for you and three against. Some lie outright, telling us they were never part of Ultramar. Perhaps some of them sincerely believe it. A few are braver and insist the ancient treaties cannot be revoked, even by you, my lord, and are determined to retain their independence.’ ‘They are wrong,’ said Guilliman. […] 'They are… disquieted by the fate of some of their peers.’ ‘Only those who rule poorly have anything to fear,’ said Guilliman. ‘It is, naturally, the more autocratic rulers who oppose your rescinding of their independence.’ ‘Then they only delay the inevitable,’ said Guilliman. ‘They will fall into line and ask politely for mercy, or they will be executed.’ […] ‘I should never have set the Five Hundred free,’ he said. ‘My lord?’ said Ventris. ‘I should not have done it,’ repeated Guilliman. ‘I thought I was doing the right thing. I thought I was following the Emperor’s wishes, letting men rule the affairs of men.’

A lot of people look at this passage and think they’re seeing Guilliman clean up corruption in the 500 Worlds. I’m sure he will, but that’s not what’s happening here. This is an autocrat ruthlessly crushing resistance.

Why are these worlds resisting? Ventris claims that “naturally” the more autocratic rulers are the most resistant. Perhaps that’s true, but we also have to take into account that he is an Ultramarine talking to his genesire; he will be heavily biased in thought and word against Guilliman’s enemies. Look closer at how he describes the resisters. They invoke ancient treaties to justify their independence. They’re afraid of what will happen if they surrender. Using that information, let’s flip the chessboard and try to imagine what these demands feel like from their perspective:

You’re a human ruler. For the past ten thousand years, your planet has existed free of transhuman rule. You might even have the original treaty that granted your planet’s independence. You almost certainly regard yourself as an obedient subject of the Imperium.

All of a sudden, one of the legendary demigods of yore shows up on your doorstep and demands you to bend the knee. He doesn’t care about your treaties (which he probably signed!) or historic independence or anything. Ugly things happen to people who go against him. Oh sure, he claims that you’ll be fine, so long as you haven’t done anything wrong, but do you really believe that? You’re a ruler in the fucking Imperium. You know just how potential claimants are handled; you know how often misdeeds get dug out of the closets of inconvenient politicians. Shit, you've probably done that yourself to your political rivals. Do you really think that you’ll be okay? And if you actually care about your planet, can you really trust him to give a damn about the lives of your people? Transhumans do tend to be aloof creatures convinced in their own superiority…

Guilliman doesn’t consider any of these possibilities, not even for the purposes of negotiation. Guilliman doesn’t care. He’s right, you’re wrong, and therefore he’s justified in doing whatever it takes to make you comply. This is 40k. “Whatever it takes” includes cyclonic torpedoes.

The most damning part IMO are Guilliman’s words at the end. He didn’t grant these worlds their liberty because he trusted humans to look after themselves. He granted them liberty in obedience to Dad. Humans’ thoughts, beliefs, and opinions never entered the equation. And now, coming back to the Imperium at its lowest point, he concludes that it was a mistake to give humans the benefit of the doubt.

The Imperium lasted ten thousand years under human rule. It survived the Great Beast, twelve Black Crusades, the Nova Terra civil war, the False Primarch, the Age of Apostasy, three Tyranid Wars, and Throne knows what else—not just survived, but even thrived in many cases. Under transhuman rule, the Imperium lasted six fucking years before it exploded into civil war that nearly destroyed the whole empire and even the galaxy itself. But it was a mistake to let humans rule themselves. Riiiiiiiiight.

#warhammer 40k #roboute guilliman

157 notes · View notes

docprof · 27 days ago

Text

Mene mene tekel upharsin Part 5 - NATO Ukraine USA stand defeated

The money laundering of Democrats Obama Biden Kamala Harris is bleeding USA to DEATH... the empire is crumbling.... Ukraine is dead with no soldiers left to fight .... over 1.1 million UKRANIAN Soldiers are dead... NATO is rendered toothless demilitarized with over 600K NATO soldiers dead... so much so that FRANCE is desperately urging , EVERY EU Nation to send soldiers to Ukraine ; to which Poland and most Violent Russophobe Eastern European states refused...

The reason is simple.... they all know, they can't survive on the battleground ... it is a different thing, to shout from your chairs and chambers , but in reality even British Army , as per their own internal assessment, can't last for a week against Russian army....

In a master chess move Putin and Erdogan of Turkey reached a deal pitching NATO Vs NATO... Turkey forces are fighting USA backed militia in Syria... Sec Blinken had to rush to Turkey to urge them to not kill all NATO militia in Syria ..... Vultures have started gathering... Erdogan is talking of cancelling 100 year old WW1 treaty and re-enacting OTTAMAN Empire ... the ancient battle ground has opened up... all this thanks to inferior USA weapons and technology .... and the weakening of the USA .... thanks to stupid American voters who kept Democrats in powers for so long .... they have done nothing but looted USA and pardoned the corrupt .

America is trying to win an imaginary war by propaganda like it always has... USA is on its knees; few steps away from surrendering or breaking away... Can Trump Save it? Perhaps not... hence he is proclaiming to make CANADA and MEXICO American states... The dethroned bankrupt empire of lies and deceit can now only rule its own neighbors... Kiss Rule based order good bye....

While delusional Ukrainian NATO Europeans are dreaming of Russia breaking and surrendering .... not knowing their master is about to desert them... to save itself... from nuclear oblivion.... loser NATO Ukraine EU can't dictate terms and will not be allowed to.... ad infinitum WWIII...

Nothing unites the human playground quite like one intrepid soul willing to stand, fight, and humble the bully.

The tripartite alliance of Russia, China, and Iran is an adversary more than adequate to roll back imperial rule by leaps and bounds, and in a relatively short span of time.

Many of the “middle powers” can also see which way the wind is blowing, and are positioning themselves accordingly. Spheres of influence are being aggressively pursued and secured in every quarter of the earth.

And perhaps most meaningful of all, they are cooperating to progressively repudiate the empire’s debt notes as the coin of the realm. They have come to understand that a prerequisite to “fixing the world” is to return its money system to a much more equitable and sustainable basis.

An alternative currency is coming... USD will come to an end much sooner than FED would have stupid americans believe.... The corruption of Obama Biden Harris Democrats has rotted America to the core ... USA lost the big war...

The DEATH OF EMPIRE IS MARKED........ whether it goes down slowly, or takes away whole earth in a fit of rage, by launching nuclear war which it can't win.... remains to be seen .... having lost the traditional proxy war .... with armies no longer willing to fight as proxy for it....

USA Democracy farce and hypocrisy stands exposed with increasing governments calling it out... including the majority nations in the UN...

It appears Russia has cut the empire into pieces.... it has achieved what Gorbachev and soviets compromised to not achieve for peace... The days of americans will be numbered with poverty , hunger and reality shocks, as World economy, decouples from the USD over coming years.... No more money printing will save the EMPIRE or turn the tide..........

PART 6 TO COME.....

104 notes · View notes

ifindus · 2 months ago

Note

I didn't know norway has interacted with HRE, could you tell us more about that?👁️

Of course!! Don't mind the essay below ✨

A direct relationship between Norway and HRE is difficult to find due to many reasons. One reason is that while HRE existed (962-1806) Norway was for the most part bound to Denmark and becomes non-existent in international relations. Another reason is the way that HRE was organized made it difficult to have a linear and stable relation. We mainly see potential interactions between HRE and Norway in two different ways: the Hanseatic league, and through wars and treaties.

The Hanseatic league.

The Hanseatic League was a guild of German tradesmen founded in the early 1100s, growing into a large organization for all German tradesmen by 1282. The guild was a result of common interests in trade and a need to protection; a network of alliances. They were essentially tradesmen based in the German area (HRE at the time) who banded together to make more profit in other cities and nations. Some foreign cities even getting their own areas where the German tradesmen lived and functioned as they would have under German rule. Bergen is a great example of this, and was the only Norwegian city included in the Hanseatic League trading network with an office, where still today there are areas referred to as the German dock. The League had their own laws and rules their members had to align with and had its high point from the 1300s to the middle of the 1400s.

The Hanseatic League founded the German office in Bergen at a time the Norwegian nation was weakened by the Black Plague. The access to grain from the Baltics was important for Norwegians and in Bergen the Germans got access to dried fish that came south from Northern Norway as well as fish oil, beer, iron, and certain fabrics. From around 1560, however, the Hanseatic League’s power in Bergen diminished as the Norwegian townspeople got a stronger trading position. Still, the Hanseatic League dominated the trade in Bergen until the middle of the 1700s. The Hanseatic office in Bergen was one of the last sold in 1754. The German population living in Bergen interacted with the locals through cooperation, competition, and conflict and had a great influence on the city.

The Hanseatic League was a major force in Northern Europe during the middle ages and more or less controlled all trade in the North, stretching from the Baltics to England. Middle Low German dominated the trading sphere and such has had a great influence of the Norwegian language and terms connected to trade. The Hanseatic League also made it easier for Norwegians to get access to continental goods and a more steady access to grain.

Wars and Treaties.

Firstly, there’s the German-Danish War of 974, where Norway fought along side Denmark against HRE. This is perhaps the only time we see a direct interaction between the nation Norway and HRE. HRE wanted to crush the Danish rebellion and prevent Viking raids further south. Denmark and Norway moved into German territory to ransack, and the first battle ended with a surprising Danish victory. After this battle, Norway returned home. A year later, HRE attacked again and this time they were successful, bringing the war into Denmark and even claiming Danish territory. The wat was a Danish loss.

Then we have the Treaty of Speyer in 1544 where the HRE Emperor recognised Christian III as the rightful king of Denmark and Norway and fully supported him against his rivals (just so far as to not aid them). In return Denmark-Norway would become pro-Hapsburg and respect the rights of the Teutonic Order, as they had had some disagreements over land previously.

Then there was the Danish-Norwegian involvement in the Thrity Years’ War (1618-1648) started in 1625. The war was in large related to a religious conflict within the borders of the HRE, and a want for European dominance between the Hapsburgs (Spain and Austria) and the House of Bourbon (France). The possibility to gain territories and seeing the war as a threat towards protestantism was what prompted Denmark-Norway to enter the war. Denmark was already present in German area due to trade and control of rivers leading into the sea around Denmark. The Danish intervention was financed by the Dutch and the English against HRE. The following battles were a massive failure for Denmark.

The Danish-Norwegian participation in the Thirty Years’ War ended with the treaty of Lübeck, signed in 1629, between HRE and Denmark-Norway. After the treaty, Denmark-Norway contributed to the war on HRE’s side and had to relinquish some territories. HRE and Denmark-Norway also ended up on the same side in the Franco-Dutch War (1672-1678), fighting against France, though they were both occupied in different areas of the war and never fought together.

HRE and Denmark-Norway were on opposing side in the Napoleonic Wars (1803-1814), which led to the dissolution of HRE in 1806) and a cede of Norway to Sweden in 1814, but never engaged in any battles against each other.

Summary.

The most extensive and influential interaction between Norway and HRE was within trade and contact through the Hanseatic League, with extensive cultural exchanges affecting language and norms and even local Norwegian politics.

They rarely dealt with each other directly in wars and treaties as the treaties were mainly organized by Denmark and to avoid fighting each other in the wars. The one time Norway as an independent nation fought against HRE in battle, Norway won. And Denmark lost.

#hetalia #historical hetalia #aph norway #aph hre #hws norway #hws hre #aph holy roman empire #hws holy roman empire #thanks for the ask!! 💖💖 I have been in a historical mood lately and finally got around to it #there is also a hanseatic museum in Bergen - can't remember if I've been there or not #but I've been to other museums there and they really emphasises the importance of the Hanseatic League and its presence in the city #also wanted to re-use Norway's middle ages clothes from my last post 🙏 it's about the same time period sooo

57 notes · View notes

dalishious · 10 months ago

Text

Reclaiming Independence of the Dales

Before anything else, I’d just like to clarify that that vast majority of this is made of my own ideas, based on interpretation from the little canonical information provided, and a little inspired by my own people’s history and governing structure. Additionally, what I am presenting here is an ideal situation, not necessarily what I think is an immediately realistic outcome in the world-state established. So, please keep that in mind.

The Dales were established as a homeland for elves—a small piece of a continent that was once called their home in its entirety, before the humans colonized it—by Maferath in -165 Ancient. This was in reward for the eleven people’s participation in the fight against Ancient Tevinter. But in 2:10 Glory, Divine Renata I broke this treaty and declared an Exalted March against the Dales, ending in its annexation by Orlais.

[Related Post: All You Need to Know about the Exalted March of the Dales]

If Solas has very low approval with Inquisitor Lavellan, and Lavellan accuses him of not doing enough to help their people, he will say the following: “You could order Halamshiral returned to the Dalish, if you wished. But ultimately, you know that would fail. That even you cannot solve this.” I hate this with a burning passion. The reason I can’t do that, Solas, is because it’s not an option in the game! Why are you as a character angry at me, the player, for not doing something that is not an option for me to do? Why was this written? Just to push the point that it’s not worth it to try and fight back against oppression? Because if I refuse to accept hopelessness in real life, why would I in accept it in a video game where the story is made-up, and therefore anything is possible if the developers so wish it.

Regardless, according to Solas, the Inquisition has enough power to support the reclamation of an independent Dales. I imagine this would require a lot of political maneuvering within the Orlesian governance, and therefore I think the best opportunity to do this would be with Briala ruling through Gaspard. This would then later open the door for Briala to be the leader of the newly independent Dales, too. I would like to see Briala as ruler of the Dales not just because she is a favourite of mine, but because I genuinely believe she is the best established character fit for the job. She was trained in everything Celene was trained in, has first-hand experience in court, has extensive connections, and has demonstrated her ability and desire to utilize these skills and assets for the benefit of elven kind.

Briala’s blackmail on Gaspard may help prevent Orlais from invading again while under his rule, but to last longer, the Dales would need to establish itself as a strong, independent Nation with allies. This is why I believe it would also be important to have Leliana as Divine Victoria in such a world-state where this could happen. Leliana re-canonizes the Canticle of Shartan, and in making it available for the common person to understand, would ideally help sway the minds of the average Andrastian into supporting the Dales’s independence. The nobility would of course be much trickier, because they and the Chantry are the ones who actually benefitted from its annexation—but there is little they would be able to actually accomplish if they did not have the power of the people behind them.

As far as allies go, Ferelden could only gain from Orlais losing control of the Dales, because it would mean cutting Orlais off from a lot of Ferelden’s border, therefore reducing the threat of another invasion. Additionally, a leader with just plain good morals like say, Alistair, would easily accept the elven kingdom’s return. But even Anora is willing to grant part of the Korcari Wilds to the Dalish if Mahariel requests it, and while this sadly doesn’t last, it does show a positive sign into her potentially being open to the idea of an independent Dales as well.

I sincerely doubt that all Dalish clans would return to the Dales and re-settle down. After all, they have developed differentiating cultures over the years of wandering in separated groups, with different ideals and different ways of life that they might not want to give up. But many would return, and that would likely create conflict between the elves coming from the Dalish clans and the elves coming from the cities. We know that some prejudice exists against “flat-ears” as some Dalish call those from the city, and we know that city elves have adopted a lot of misinformation from humans into their views of the Dalish. It would take time and positive leadership to reconnect the people, without risking falling into some sort of hierarchy based on origin. This is why I do not believe one group or the other should single-handedly rule alone. Rather, I think there should be a Grand Council of High Keepers made up of those voted into the position each to represent a single district of the Dales. (I like the idea of there being seven High Keepers, not just because there are seven traditional districts of Mi’kma’ki, but because it works out that there seven of the Creators. So it makes sense that there would be seven High Keepers.) The Grand Council would meet and make decisions together, with one appointed leader at the head to act as the Council’s chair.

In terms of protection and order, the Emerald Knights should be reformed. This would include the Fade Hunters, to protect the people against demons and maleficarum, with there being no Circles or Templars.

Restoring the independence of the Dales would lead to a revival of elven culture in ways that could never happen before, because they would actually be free to pursue re-learning the language, re-discovering the history and culture, and sharing it all amongst each other. They would not have to fear arrest the crime of simply being an elf.

But what of the other races presently living in the Dales? I see no reason why they would have to leave, so long as they would be willing to follow the Grand Council’s leadership. I imagine many nobility would flee to Orlais, simply because they would not stand for it. But for the average human or surface dwarf, their life wouldn’t really even change much; they’d still be managing their farms the same as always. Hell, it might even improve things for them, assuming the Grand Council gives fairer treatment than the nobility previously.

#dragon age #the dales #elves #meta

160 notes · View notes

gwenllian-in-the-abbey · 5 months ago

Note

hi! so i started reading when christ and his saints slept (your recommendation, it's great btw) and wow george really dropped the ball on the dance cause what is this going on. like older sister against brother?? why would that work George??

i've seen tb make arguments that the usurpation set women's rights back for centuries, and that seems kind of silly cause the rule of (bloody) mary i still led to the rule of elizabeth i. personally, i think the issue of women's rights has more to do with the lack of queen dowagers and regents which are more common in real history but less in asoiaf who use their power of being mothers of the king to advocate for women, and lay the groundwork (e.g. margaret beaufort, nurbanu sultan, anne of austria, etc)

but, also what are the greens meant to do because if viserys did not settle inheritance for his sons (through heiresses) whilst he lived there's no reason why rhaenyra would do it when she's queen.

for me the greens have three options : take the throne through conquest, ask for a great council (they have vhagar they can make demands), or three literally die.

like as much as i am green supporter if i was rhaenyra and i peacefully ascended to the throne and my half-siblings who are brothers with sons of their own well, they just have to die ottoman style, because allowing them cadet branches undermines her own and in the end you get a house bourbon supplanting house valois situation (something catherine de medici committed war crimes to prevent); you can't let them leave because well 6 dragons outside of targaryen control — you might as well be asking for trouble ; send them to the citadel —well two are married to each other, one has vhagar with clear anger issues, the other has tessarion and can just leave when he wants and, not even talking about the kids with their own dragons.

the truth is the greens can't just sit and do nothing. if viserys doesn't want the trouble of his sons ,and wants rhaenyra has queen then simply don't remarry or do you your duty to the sons that you have sired.

reading christ and when his saints slepts its actually comical how house targaryen don't have mistresses and they began to have them when the dragons are dead

this was a long rant but the greens don't have much options especailly cause their living in an environment where sons inherit before daughters. i would ask how would you make the story more compelling and logical causing reading penman the dance is not.

also, big can of your writing ofcir and akab are holding me down since hotd has been feeding us crap.

Anon I've had this reply sitting in my drafts and should have answered ages ago, so my apologies for the late reply!

I'm so glad you're reading When Christ and His Saints Slept. It's my go-to recommendation for historical fiction about the Anarchy, and Penman in general is just my absolute favorite historical fiction writer. I hope you continue the series that follows Matilda's son, Henry II, his wife Eleanor of Aquitaine, and their brood of children.

You're right that the greens didn't have many options if they wanted to stay alive. The show has downplayed that aspect this season but Alicent's sons and grandsons would always be a challenge to Rhaenyra and Jace's rule. You only need a basic understanding of the world to see that they were in an impossible position. Ultimately, Viserys is the one who destabilized his succession and deserves a lot more blame than the show is willing to give him.

As for the matter of powerful women, queens regnant, and women's rights, irl history is full of powerful queen consorts like Eleanor who exercised power, defended garrisons, negotiated peace, and sometimes, as in Eleanor's case, even rebelled against their own husbands. In the Anarchy, Stephen's wife, Matilda of Boulogne, was a force to be reckoned with, besieging Dover castle and making a treaty for Stephen with the king of Scotland. When he was captured in battle, Matilda raised an army, and when her army captured Empress Matilda's half-brother, Robert of Gloucester, who was one of her biggest supporters, Matilda of Boulogne negotiated a hostage exchange and secured Stephen's release. And this isn't even a Westeros problem because we see politically powerful women who are not queens regnant in-world-- Cersei as regent for her children, Catelyn, who was basically running the war effort before Robb set her aside, and even book!Alicent, who exercised a good deal of power. In fact, somewhat ironically, show!Alicent was well set up to exercise even more power than her book counterpart. It's clear Aegon actually listened to her and valued her counsel, even seeking out her advice and guidance. Having the ear of the king is no small thing, and if she'd done anything other than belittle him she could have ended up as his most trusted advisor. Look how easily Larys moved in! But the show instead had Alicent alienate Aegon and then treated her disempowerment as if it were a function of her gender rather than a result of her inability to provide useful counsel.

So no, a lack of queens regnant is not keeping Westerosi women out of powerful positions, and you're right anon, in that HotD seems to have decided that powerful women didn't exist as consorts, dowagers, and regents even though that's not true irl or in Westeros. As for women's rights, unfortunately having a queen regnant historically has done very little for women as a whole. Royal women tended to align their interests with other royals or nobles rather than with women as a whole, that is, solidarity is formed along class lines more often than it is formed along gendered lines. We see this even in our world today, where companies with women as CEOs in fact tend to hire fewer women in lower management positions. Rhaenyra being denied the throne doesn't mean much for the average Westerosi woman, but civil wars caused by an unstable succession can make everyone's lives demonstrably worse.

#asks #sharon k penman #alicent hightower #team green #hotd critical #westerosi women

73 notes · View notes

cipheramnesia · 3 months ago

Text

a story by @rox-and-prose and @cipheramnesia

Part 8: Vigil

"I am not prone to long speeches," Vanya Steyr had said, welcoming the incoming new hires to the G1 Major Treaty Enforcement Central orientation day. Maryam had thought they seemed very impressive, perhaps evem dangerous.

"You will learn all the information you need to start your jobs here. You will not learn one right way to do your jobs until you are in the middle of them." They had stood at the front of a sizable auditorium, and had not used any amplification. Maryam remembered even after the subsequent weeks of stultifying bureaucratic form memorization and procedural filing specific to Major Treaties, the departments, grades, fire safety, system safety, and so on.

Years of experience, climbing the ranks, passing pilot exams and system plotting. All of it each time seemed like the most information she could hope to retain, Vanya stuck with her. "When you are doing this work, at all levels," they said, "remember why we have major treaties. They are to protect us, earth and her civilization, wherever we may find ourselves. We protect ourselves from destroying ourselves, because it is our nature."

That was the most of Vany Steyr she had ever seen outside of the odd sysnet photo or short interview up until they took a personal interest in the Charybdis WMD case. Following Steyr's system jumps in the Marzanna, a ship that by what few specs she'd had the chance to glimpse was perhaps hundreds or thousands of times more dangerous than any WMD case she'd worked or reviewed, she worried over "it is our nature."

Maryam had always operated with the consideration that it was in the nature of everyone from earth civilization to protect themselves. This idea had given her comfort and guidance in her cases and the vast organized network of central bureaucracy. The scope of civilization, she sometimes pretended, was possible to see as one vastly extended process to keep its many inhabitants or societies safe. It drove fear and love and hate and hope and all those things.

She knew it was an oversimplification, but it gave her a place to start when she wasn't sure. The one possibility she'd never entertained until now was that Steyr had never meant it was in the nature of civilization to protect itself.

Trevor remained intensely focused in pulling the Lev Nitoburg off the map for the Marzanna's deep spacers. Maryam had no idea what was ever going on with the woman. Serah looked worried, maybe a little bit pale. It had been one thing to figure out Kan was spying for the boss, quite another to decide the boss was violating the most basic rule in civilation, while it happened right in front of their eyes.

Minutes ticked away between the system resolutions. Serah caught Maryam looking and gave a sick smile. She got up and went back to Serah, crouching by her chair. "Serah," she said.

"Hey," Serah said.

"There is no need worry so dearly," Maryam said. "This is the type of case we have all the time. It is nothing, a piece of cake."

"You're awful at lying."

"I am. But you have seen more of the Marzanna specifications than myself. Would you consider it falling within regulations? Would the Lev Nitoburg?"

"No... and... it's pushing it, toeing the letter of the treaty..."

"So it goes," Maryam said. "I only know I am of the belief that we owe it to our civilization to safeguard the treaty against WMD's, even if they are of our own invention."

"You're probably right." Serah looked at her screen. "Did you know that thing can project an artificial stellar gravity well?"

"I had some sense but I did not realize the extent of it."

"It could probably pull some planets apart. Maybe even destroy a sun, if you used it right." Serah's face was grim.

Maryam took one of Serah's hands in two of hers. Serah squeezed. "We are making the right choice." She squeezed back.

"We gotta be. Nothing but the right choice could ever feel this dumb."

#gkw #the beginning of the end #been so sick for two weeks now but we're starting this

75 notes · View notes

whumpster-fire · 6 months ago

Text

"Medieval" fantasy setting that has its "plate armor at a level of advancement that IRL was developed when guns and cannons were a thing but warfare is almost entirely pre-gunpowder" stasis maintained because of dragons. Not generic magical threats or "magic is better anyway," but dragons specifically.

More specifically, the world is in the aftermath of a catastrophic war where dragons were hunted to near extinction, and humanity came pretty close to being wiped out as well. As a result of this, one of the few things that can actually get dragons to cooperate with each other is a country getting serious about firearms development. In some cases there are explicit nonproliferation treaties, in others it's just a general threat of "look what happened to the last guys," but regardless, almost nobody has anything beyond very primitive firearms because to a species that lives for many centuries, a human nation coming within 50-100 years of mass-produced flack cannons is an existential threat. The red line technologies aren't even weapons that are particularly effective against dragons on their own, they're just precursors to things that are.

(And just to be clear, this isn't a "dragons rule the world and want to keep humans in their place" setting, this is a "dragons mostly want little or nothing to do with humans but humans are bad at minding their own business" setting.)

Half of human-dragon conflict is a result of agricultural/herding societies expanding into dragons' territories and replacing prey animal populations with cattle, which dragons would generally be fine with as it results in abundant and easy to kill prey if the humans didn't believe they had an exclusive right to eat said cattle. Even if you come to a reasonable, mutually beneficial agreement there's no guarantee that in a hundred years the original humans' descendants won't change their minds and declare you to be a tyrant, then try to kill you. Most of the other half is a result of humans actively hunting dragons because their body parts are valuable and/or because dragon eggs need strong ambient magic to incubate which usually means building a nest out of enchanted objects and/or magic-amplifying materials. Also from a dragon's perspective a 'peaceful' human society can turn into an aggressive, colonizing, genocidal empire really goddamn fast.

If dragons see humans as insects, they're regarded as the equivalent of an aggressive, invasive, really annoying and sometimes deadly kind of wasp that might create desirable resources if you have them around but they're more trouble than they're worth because they'll build massive nests in your yard and then it's only a matter of time before you get stung for existing in your own home, and also they can chew holes in the walls and swarm-attack you and your children in their sleep. Combine all the worst fearmongering about africanized honeybees and asian giant hornets and you'll have a good idea of how dragons see humans. The reason dragons trying to coexist in proximity to humans are a small minority isn't because most dragons are going "You soft hearted loser, caring about such meaningless creatures," it's because they're going "You fucking idiot, you can't share territory with humans, they'll turn on you as soon as there's a famine or their population gets too big for the land to support you and them. Individual humans can be okay but if you let them build a city on your turf it's a matter of when, not if, it becomes a problem."

#fantasy #dragons #random ideas #worldbuilding

106 notes · View notes

sel-enha-phile · 12 days ago

Text

A Symphony of Midnight

✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩

✩ Enhypen x Fem!Reader ✩ Word Count: 3.3k ✩ Warnings: Mentions of Alcohol, Death, Blood, War ✩ ✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩ When an ancient relic shatters and the treaty safeguarding peace between humans and vampires is broken, Y/N Valerian finds herself accused of the unthinkable—the murder of her father and the destruction of the relic. Thrust into a perilous world of supernatural intrigue, she becomes entangled with the Seven Vampire Princes of the Anaima bloodline.

Amid rising tensions, political machinations, and the looming threat of war, Y/N must navigate a labyrinth of deception while grappling with a forbidden love that defies centuries-old laws. But the greatest revelation lies within herself: her blood holds the power to either doom the world to annihilation or offer its ultimate salvation. ✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩

The grand chamber of the Valerian Estate gleamed with lavish splendor, its polished marble floors reflecting the soft glow of countless candles suspended in crystal chandeliers. Every surface seemed to catch the light, amplifying the grandeur of the occasion. The air was alive with a symphony of voices- human and vampire mingling in a precarious sort of harmony.

For two centuries, the Luminis Accord had upheld an uneasy peace between the two races, and tonight’s bicentennial celebration was meant to further solidify that fragile coexistence.

You lingered at the very edge of the crowd where your existence went unnoticed; a goblet of wine resting idly in your hand, its deep crimson swirling as you moved your wrist absently. It wasn't that you preferred to drink all that much. In all honesty the stench of liquor of any sort made your stomach churn and your head quite a bit dizzier than one's normal state of tipsiness. So, a lack of sobriety is not something you often found yourself aiming for, lest your mind needed clearing.

Tonight was one of those nights. For some reason your senses were on high alert, and it brought an ostentatious unease to you as if you were apart from yourself. You stand to be around vampires tonight; but oddly enough it bothered you even more to be around your own kind.

Your eyes traced the room before landing on your father, Lord Callan Valerian. He moved through the sea of dignitaries with a confidence that seemed effortless, his silver hair catching the chandelier's light as though it were a crown.

It would make sense if it were. He was what could be equivalent to royalty in your world. His great- great grandfather had been the one to present the Luminis Accord to the vampires; so to the current assembly and those before, anyone of the valerian blood was a symbol of unity, the architect of a treaty that had held firm against decades of doubt and mistrust- a leader in the simplest sense.

For decades there was only men born to the Valerian blood- the product of what many believed to be a curse used in the making of the treaty- seven sons to a family to mirror the seven Princes. Your father's only heir was you.

At first many questions your father's lineage due to only you being born- a female. The first since the making of the treaty. Had your father went against the rules?

The rules were simple. Any women born the same year as the one of Valerian blood were for selection- as long as they were pure.

It was a rather stupid rule you felt, in the times you lived in. But your mother was the same age as your father. And to everyone's knowledge had been celibate up until her betrothal. Did he have relations with someone other than a woman you had called your mother?

It didn't seem that way at your mother's deathbed. Your young self-remembered vividly just how loud your father had wailed. As if he was grieving even beyond your mother's life.

After her death he put so much into leading, even the Ambassadors and Council members who used to be against him vied for his attention, their deference a testament to his influence. He was their savior.

To you, he was simply Father- a man of uncompromising principles and even stricter expectations, whose shadow you had never fully stepped out of.

Yet tonight, something about him was different. His expression, always composed, carried a tension that was hard to ignore. His smiles were fleeting, forced, and his words to the assembled guests felt more measured than usual. Beneath his polished exterior, a weight pressed on him, and you could feel it in the fleeting glances he cast across the room, the wrinkles in his face, the crease in his brows, as if anticipating a threat no one else could see.

"Y/N, my lovely child," he had said earlier, his hand firm but uncharacteristically warm on your shoulder. "Stay close tonight, alright?"

The request had surprised you. He rarely spoke to you so directly during public events, much less asked for your presence. Usually, your role was ceremonial- a silent reminder of the continuation of the Valerian lineage. You were no diplomat, no tactician, no leader- even if one day you were expected to be one. You were a historian, content to study the echoes of the past rather than shape the present. That was your passion. A choice your father had long viewed with quiet disappointment, though he had grudgingly accepted it.

You had nodded, offering no protest, as he pet your head- the first he had done since you were a child; but now his words lingered in your mind, heavier than they had felt earlier. Standing alone amid the thrumming energy of the room, you couldn’t shake the feeling that they carried a warning you hadn’t understood.

He hadn’t smiled. Not even once to anyone else. But the small smile he gave before strutting off set in your heart like a heavy stone.

The unease in your chest deepened, and you found yourself wishing you had pressed him for more. Why tonight of all nights? What had he seen- or feared -that made him act so unlike himself? The question lingered, unanswered, as the crowd swirled around you in blissful ignorance.

Was it perhaps what you had confronted him about? The truth behind the Luminis Accord? How it wasn't offered as peace but more so-

Your thoughts were interrupted by a sharp crash of breaking glass. Subtle, almost imperceptible to the human ear, but distinct enough to snag your attention. You looked out at the crowd, no heads turning save for a few miscellaneous councilmen from the vampiric side. And even the vampires playing in the string quartet.

You turned, your frown deepening, knowing you didn't imagine what you heard. Maybe no other human was close enough? So you made your way in the direction of the noise, which led towards a small antechamber that led to the diplomats' counsel room.

Then came the scream.

It was high and piercing, cutting through the air like a blade, causing you to rush. The music stuttered into silence for a split second; but you barely register that as you pushed through the door, recognizing the scream all too well. Dread coiled in your chest as your feet moved of their own accord, heart pounded, each step quickening until you reached the room. The sight before you stole the breath from your lungs.

Slumped against the polished wood of his desk was your father, his body framed by a pool of blood that seeped into the intricate weave of the ornate rug. His skin, once so full of vitality, was pallid and waxen, his eyes fixed on nothing as he coughed out blood. At his feet lay the shattered remains of the Relic of Luminis Accord; its crystal fragments glinting like cruel stars in the dim light.

“Father?” The word left your lips as a whisper, trembling and fragile. You dropped to your knees beside him, hands hovering, useless and shaking, over his stilling form. He had a slit in his throat, accompanied with two small puncture marks. And a large wound in his abdomen.

The coppery scent of blood was thick and cloying, turning your stomach as tears blurred your vision.

"Listen." Your father sputtered, his blood landing on your dress. "I broke...long ago." His eyes were wide. "The treaty. It's my fault. You're in danger." He coughed once more, slumping against you. Your eyes were frantic as you tried to cover the bleeding.

Do I cover his abdomen or this cut in his throat-

"Father-"

"Don't. Trust them...my child-"

“What have you done?!”

The voice jolted through you like a whip crack. Sharp, accusing. You spun to see Prince Sunghoon standing in the doorway, his silhouette stark against the flickering glow of the main hall. His hand rested on the hilt of his blade- as if he couldn't finish someone with his bare hands. His expression, usually so unreadable, was etched with tension as his gaze flicked between you, your father, and the shattered relic.

Before you could speak, Prince Jake stepped into the room, halting abruptly as the scent of blood hit him. His face twisted, fangs elongating involuntarily. A hand shot up to cover his mouth, his breaths ragged and shallow as he tried to wrest control from the primal hunger clawing at his senses.

“I’ve never craved like this before,” Jake muttered, his voice muffled and hoarse. His shoulders shook, his darkened eyes fixed on the blood soaking into the rug.

Sunghoon’s jaw tightened, his own fangs pressing against his lower lip as he fought the same battle. The stench of death was undeniable, but beneath it was something else- something potent and intoxicating and delicious that set his instincts ablaze. He forced his gaze away from your father’s lifeless form, focusing instead on the relic’s jagged shards.

“The relic is destroyed,” he said, his voice low and steady, though his mind reeled. The relic had been more than a mere artifact. It was a safeguard, a delicate tether holding the balance between human and vampire. Its destruction wasn’t just a tragedy- it was a declaration of war.

But it's not as if a human- regardless of political positioning would know that.

Should, know that.

His gaze snapped back to you. You, kneeling in the blood of Lord Callan, with the relic’s shattered remains glinting at your feet. The image was damning, undeniable.

Footsteps echoed behind him, hurried and insistent. The other princes arrived, followed by a flood of nobles and guards, their collective presence suffocating the room. The murmurs swelled into an uproar, a sea of voices crying out for answers, for retribution.

You looked up, your eyes connecting with the one damning you.

“Seize her!” The command rang out from the eldest prince, sharp and unyielding.

Hands closed around your arms, hauling you to your feet with a force that left you reeling.

"FATHER-" You thrashed instinctively, panic surging as the weight of the accusations pressed down on you. Grief twisted into raw, frantic denial, but the faces around you were cold, unrelenting.

The room blurred as you were dragged towards the center of the ballroom, where the party had now stopped, your please not even being allowed to be swallowed by the tide of voices. Silence happening in almost an instant.

It was happening too fast, a nightmare spiraling out of control, and no one would listen. The truth was trapped in your throat, smothered by the crushing weight of grief and the suffocating certainty of your father’s death.

The princes- all seven of them -stood in a line, their presence commanding even amidst the chaos.

Heeseung stepped forward, his expression unreadable as his gaze swept over you. He held up a hand, and the room fell silent.

“Y/N Valerian,” he said, his voice cold and measured. “You stand accused of breaking the Luminis Accord and the murder of the human Lord Callan Valerian. An act of treason not only against both your kind and ours; but your own blood. What do you have to say in your defense?”

“I didn’t-” you began, but your voice faltered. You looked around the room, at the faces of those who had known your father, who had once treated you with kindness. Now, their eyes were filled with suspicion, their expressions hardened with fear. "I didn't kill him! Why would I-"

“Enough!” Heeseung’s voice rang out, slicing through your protest like a blade. “The evidence is clear. Lord Callan is dead. The relic is destroyed. And you were the only one found at the scene.”

“It wasn’t me!” you cried, desperation choking your voice. “I would never- he was my father, for the sake of all that’s holy!”

“You stand to gain the most from his death,” Jungwon said, his tone steady yet cutting. The younger prince’s gaze bore into you, calculating. “Not only do you inherit his political influence, but you also gain unrestricted access to…further your historical pursuits, do you not?”

"Thats not...that's not true." You wavered.

“And yet, here we are,” Sunghoon murmured, his voice quieter but no less condemning. His eyes lingered on you, heavy with an unspoken question, as though searching for cracks in your resolve.

“I desire none of his power!” Your voice rose, firm and unyielding, despite the tears stinging your eyes. “My father knew that- you all knew that!” You thrashed against the iron grip of the guards holding you. “I have no wish to be a pawn in your games. I have no wish to be used by you or anyone else!”

The air in the chamber grew taut, the princes exchanging glances as murmurs rippled through the room like a brewing storm.

“You think I don’t see it?” you spat, eyes blazing as they darted from one prince to the next. Sunoo blinked slowly at you, and in an instant his face changed as he mouthed something that made Jay and Ni-ki's head turn and Sunoo made the movement of coming towards you. “The imbalance, the lies, the convenience of all of this. Don’t you vampires have the most to gain from this farce? Why don’t you tell everyone the truth about what the relic really was-”

In a blur of movement, Sunoo was in front of you, his hand clamping over your mouth. His eyes gleamed, something you couldn't place harbored in them, as he leaned close. “Not another word.” he growled, his voice a low, dangerous rumble. Nearly inaudible. "Or else I can't help you." He said, his voice softening. You looked up with a questioning gaze, everything feeling like it was happening in a matter of seconds. Slowly, he withdrew his hand, the look in his eyes and the gaze he then threw towards Jungwon making your jaw twitch.

“What do we do with her?” Jake’s voice broke the silence, tight and strained. His eyes avoided yours, focusing instead on the bloodstains still marring your clothes. You saw the flicker of hunger in his expression, quickly smothered, but not before it chilled you to your core.

At least he had the audacity to look ashamed.

“Hand her over!” a voice from the human delegation rang out. It was your father’s advisor, Sir Chetaire- the man you’d once called uncle. His wrinkled hands wrung together as he addressed the princes, his voice trembling with poorly disguised fear. “Let the princes deal with her. Surely that will…quell the unrest.” He got onto his knees, as if ready to worship the ground the princes stood on.

One of the vampire guards stepped forward but not before Jungwon raised his hand, cocking his head as if considering the propsal.

Your heart twisted, the betrayal cutting deeper than you thought possible. “You can’t be serious.” Your voice shook, disbelief and fury clawing at your composure. “You know me, Chetaire! You’ve known me my entire life. You know-”

“Silence her!” another voice hissed, igniting a flurry of accusations.

“Hand her over!”

“Murderer!”

“She killed her own father!”

Glasses began to be thrown and in an instant the humans were in upheaval that even the Vampires didn't know how to calm.

The cacophony of voices merged into a deafening roar. But you still heard Jungwon's steady voice: "Take her."

Your knees wavered as the guards tightened their grip and dragged you forward, your heel getting caught in one of the indents of the tile, allowing your foot to be bare; the world around you tilting and distorting into a surreal nightmare.

Your mind raced, desperately grasping for explanations, for anything that could piece this madness into coherence. But there was nothing. No reprieve. Only the cruel, unyielding truth:

Your father was dead, and they had cast you as the villain in a tragedy not of your making.

The celebration was long over now; humans being escorted towards the entrance- you into what you could only assume was something much more damning then the winter cold outside.

As you were escorted out before the entirety of the guests, a murmur of unease rippled through the hall, though none dared voice it aloud. Somewhere within the depths of their variant eyes, you glimpsed something fleeting in few- a flicker of doubt, or was it pity? Whatever it was, it held no power to alter your fate.

You were being offered to the ones you once called enemies. Whether as a pawn for interrogation or a sacrifice for execution, the outcome remained uncertain.

What was certain, however, was the terror etched into the faces of your people. You knew better than anyone why you had been given up so easily- when you knew no one would have dared under revere for your father.

They stood silent and trembling, a stark contrast to the unyielding resolve glimmering in the eyes of the vampires of the council who bore witness.

The princes carried an aura of dominion so profound it felt oppressive, a quiet power that all recognized but none dared acknowledge aloud.

Your people had surrendered you in the hopes of appeasing these ancient forces, of forestalling the inevitable clash of fangs and steel.

Yet deep down, you knew the truth: the pact was a farce. The treaty had always been for naught.

These beings were utterly insatiable, their hunger not only for blood but for dominance eternal.

As you were whisked away into the depths of their domain, you couldn’t ignore the strain etched into the faces of the seven royals. Something primal lingered beneath their regal façades, a predatory edge sharpened to a blade’s whisper.

Your gaze locked on two of them- Jake and Jay, who were like statues hewn from moonlight, even in movement. They had always been the most composed according to ancient record, even now they were the ones humanity trusted most, yet even their eyes betrayed an agony that cut to the bone.

Sunoo and Heesung were the only ones fully in front of you, the tension in the eldest shoulders telling you a tale you weren't sure you wanted to know the extent of. Sunoo seemed to be saying something to him.

Behind you, Ni-ki and Sunghoon and Jungwon flanked your steps, silent as specters. When your eyes met the youngest's, a flicker of something indefinable passed between you. Recognition? Regret? It was gone before you could grasp its meaning.

You longed to cry out, to scream a warning to the humans who had sent you here. But your voice remained caged, like a bird caught in a storm.

The implications of Sunoo's earlier words felt like hands around your throat.

"Not another word. Or else I can't help you."

Still you wish you could say. Warn-

Run.

Run as far and as fast as you can.

The relic your ancestors had eagerly handed over centuries ago was no symbol of peace. It was a shield. A shield forged in desperation- a desperate protection against the very monsters they had now chosen to appease. A shield those same monsters had agreed upon accepting in times of comradery. Those times had long passed.

Now that the relic was destroyed they were free to do as they pleased.

And your poor, ignorant kind- in their blind hope to avert a war, they had likely sealed their doom.

With the shattering of the Relic and the death of your father, the line had been crossed.

War was not just inevitable.

It was destiny.

✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩ Ahh! First post ono my sideblog! It might take a little bit longer for me to upload this story- since as I mentioned this is my sideblog :)! But I will be doing my best to update this story as fast as possible! I hope whoever reads this enjoys! ✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩✩

31 notes · View notes

llyfrenfys · 11 months ago

Text

"Rule Britannia is out of bounds" - How England invented Great Britain

("Rule Britannia is out of bounds"- Life on Mars, David Bowie, 1971)

As promised, here is a more in-depth exploration of Wales' relationship to indigeneity or colonised status. And how England created the (political) concept of Great Britain when it formally annexed Wales in 1542. This is a long post but I will try and be brief where possible to do so. I graduated with a degree in Celtic Studies last year from Aberystwyth University so it's time to put that to use.

In my last post, I went over the groundwork for this conversation - so if you haven't read that one yet I strongly suggest you read that one first then come back to this one. In that first post, I establish the stickiness in claiming or applying the status of colonised onto the modern nation and people of Wales. I also explore how claims of indigeneity (intended to legitimise Welsh nativism through dubious claims of descent from the Iron Age Britons) are weaponised in modern political contexts.

With all that said - how does one categorise the suffering of Wales/its culture and language without straying into the language of the colonised?

Early Medieval English Imperial desire for Wales:

Very often, you will hear people make the claim that Wales was 'England's first colony' and that the other nations bordering England were guinea pigs for Britain's later colonial empire. My previous writing on this topic has established the difficulty in applying colonised as a term to Wales and its context. Which leads to the question of what do we describe it as instead?

For this, we need to make a distinction between colonialism and imperialism.

The two concepts are very similar (and do overlap slightly) but they have crucial differences which allow us to be more precise and succinct with our wording which aids both communication of the subject and quells misunderstanding through language which doesn't fit the situation.

Put simply, Imperialism is when one country, people or nation desires to extend power over another (usually a close-by or neighbouring territory) - especially (but not solely) through the means of expansionism.

Colonialism is also when a country, people or nation wants to extend power over another - but primarily through invasion and typically (but not always) against territories that are further afield and not immediate neighbours).

A lot of the way in which we view early British history in Wales is tinged with a kind of exceptionalism for what happened between England and Wales. Very often, what was done is framed as uniquely terrible for the time and held up as a poster child for the unique evil of England's expansionist desires. Yet all over Europe at the same time this was happening - other European nations and peoples were engaging in the same subjugator-subjugatee relationship. The exceptionalism present in framing Wales as uniquely suffering in this period is, unfortunately, borne out of the same British imperial culture which was thrust upon it and has become irrevocably entwined with culturally. It is a kind of British arrogance (which ironically crops up in anti-British arguments in Welsh independence activism) which presupposes nobody could have suffered the same or worse than they have, which demands the active ignorance of other, contemporary examples of that which they claim to oppose.

Wales was the first victim of English (later British) Imperialism - not its first colonial victim.

The build-up to and annexation of Wales by England:

Wales was annexed twice - once before the age of states and once shortly before that age dawned. The concept of states (as in, sovereign countries) didn't really exist until after the Treaties of Westphalia (1648). In which the concept of non-interference in the religious affairs of other countries (and other domestic affairs) was established and international relations was born. This is relevant to Wales' situation - as what England did to Wales happened long before the age of states began.

There was the Conquest of Wales by Edward I between 1277 and 1283. (Before that, the Norman Conquest of Wales by 1081). (However, the latter being conducted by the Normans is not necessarily equatable to the actions of England the country, which itself had only just been invaded by the Normans). And then the Laws in Wales Acts which formally incorporated Wales into the realm of the Kingdom of England in 1542.

The Conquest of Wales by Edward I overran the territories of the last Prince of Wales (from the Welsh monarchic tradition), Llywelyn the Last and divided the territories into Welsh Principalities and Marcher Lordships. This setup remained until 1542, when Henry VIII passed the Laws in Wales Acts and formally annexed Wales and made it (in all the legal senses) a part of England.

By the time international relations was in its infancy (i.e. shortly after the Peace of Westphalia) Wales had been absorbed into England for just over 100 years. The relevancy of this is that Westphalia had been about religious liberty - Henry VIII's incorporation of Wales into the Kingdom of England was partly informed by religion. Henry VIII had just broken away from Rome and established the Protestant Church of England, whereas Wales was still largely Catholic. The Laws in Wales Acts also replaced the language of the courts in Wales with English, cutting off monolingual Welsh speakers from legal representation. The language of worship became English instead of Latin. Wales was culturally assimilated into England over a long period of time. And that meant ensuring Wales followed the 'correct' religion and spoke the 'correct' language. After the Peace of Westphalia, these actions by Henry VIII to bend Wales to his new religion and to assimilate Wales into England would have been in poor taste or decried in light of the new Westphalian system that was developing in Europe. Alas, these events took place before then and temporally speaking, Wales was locked out of this recourse.

By contrast, Scotland was unified with England into the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707 (after the Peace of Westphalia). England committed numerous acts of cultural erosion and destruction against Wales and Scotland at this time - but its Union with Scotland differs to that with Wales. Wales was incorporated into England, whereas Scotland was 'invited' to join a union between England (which then included Wales) and itself. Simplifying it greatly - like a marriage proposal in which the two spouses are *supposed* to be equals. After the Act of Union with Scotland, the whole island of Great Britain was 'unified' and thus the Kingdom of Great Britain was formed from two states - England (inc. Wales) and Scotland into one state.

Welsh Nationalism and Nationhood as separate from Statehood:

Wales and Scotland were the victims of English imperialism in many similar, but also many different ways.

Wales, having never been a 'state' was unable to acquire this status since it had long been incorporated into England by the time the concept of states had developed. Wales was unlucky in this way, because other nations on this island such as Scotland had managed to establish themselves long enough to survive into the age of states and thus became one. Because of this, Welsh nationalism cannot look to an era in which it was a free state because that did not happen. Instead, Welsh nationalism very often looks back with rose-tinted spectacles to Wales prior to Edward I's conquest and/or prior to Henry VIII's Laws in Wales Acts.

But nationhood and statehood are not the same thing - and it is the conflation of these two concepts (like the conflation of colonialism and imperialism) which has led to much of the confusion on these topics. Nationhood is acquired by a group of people who share several of these things: a common language, history, culture and (usually) territory. Not all of these things are required, but most nations have all or almost all of these qualities. Wales has a language (Welsh), a common history, culture and territory (Wales). Statehood is acquired by an association of people who have most or all of these things: formal institutions of government, laws, permanent territorial boundaries and sovereignty. Wales before 1283 very loosely had government and laws (monarchy and Laws of Hywel Dda) but had no permanent territory due to the conquest and lost some sovereignty in 1283 and total sovereignty in 1542.

Even if Wales had met all the criteria for a state in 1283, it would not have been eligible to become one - no nation in the world was able to do that yet because the concept (or proto-concept) for it would only be invented in 1648. Even England did not qualify for state status yet. Put simply, Wales got very unlucky with history and geography in such a way which prevented it from having a historical statehood post-1648 like neighbouring England and Scotland.

Naturally, when Welsh nationalism attempts to recall a past in which it was a 'state' - it is always an imagined and romanticised history. A fantasied history which generates ideas of the persecuted 'indigenous' Cymro where it shouldn't really be (in all seriousness, the injustices inflicted upon Wales by England are enough - extra additional injustices reliant upon a claim to to 'nativeness' do not need to be invented in order to be taken seriously). In the modern world, claims of nativeness in a European context are fraught, misguided, in poor taste and often copy the homework of the indigenous peoples those same European powers marginalised or colonised. In the modern world, a white Welshman claiming indigeneity is doing so in a postcolonial world and there really is no escaping that. Succinctly - the Welsh nationalist who relies upon a created sense of nativeness can only do so by drawing upon the work of marginalised native peoples living in parts of the world formerly colonised by Great Britain. To claim native status as a Welshman is to misunderstand and misappropriate history while wielding the language of the genuinely colonised while contributing nothing to it. It is purely extractive and a slap in the face of non-European native peoples everywhere. The pining for this return* to a prior point in Wales' history where it was a fully functional, sovereign nation populated only by 'native' or 'indigenous' Cymry is an alarming and ahistorical fantasy that all too easily slides into ethnonationalism and nativism -ancient or modern.

(*the choice of the word 'return' here is no accident - the desire to 'return' is inextricably linked to the alt-right dogwhistle 'retvrn' and it it is frighteningly common to see elements of that subculture crop up in Welsh nationalist calls to return to a point in Wales' history where it was 'sovreign'.)

Welsh nationalism which isn't vigilant to this kind of thinking very often will find itself arguing blatant untruths. For example, on the milder side of fake history, I've come across Welsh nationalist groups claiming symbolism from Owain ap Gruffydd's coat of arms - despite the fact he lived before the age of heraldry and he never used these arms because they were attributed to him later.

What next for Wales after 1542?:

Since Wales was fully and formally incorporated into the Kingdom of England by 1542, English colonisation of the Americas prior to 1707 naturally included Welsh colonists as well as English colonists. After 1707 Scots joined in with the now British colonisation of the Americas (both as/for/on the side of the Brits and as Scots fleeing Scotland after the Act of Union decimated Scottish Gaelic traditional culture). The Welsh, on the other hand, were more intimately involved with the colonisation of the Americas before that.

Though England spearheaded its colonisation of the Americas, Wales was not an unwilling participant dragged along by its association with and incorporation into England - Welsh colonisation, like Scottish colonisation, was often motivated by religious or cultural persecution - of which colonisation of another land was a possible solution to cultural loss in their home countries. Pennsylvania was settled by many Welsh Quakers and the idea of a Welsh Tract was floated to the Welsh settlers in 1684. The idea was to create a county which would operate in the Welsh language and serve as a vehicle for the preservation of the Welsh language. This attempt was not as successful as Wales' colony in Patagonia, Argentina in which native populations there were displaced at the behest of the Argentinian government - who needed the land settled and cleared. Welsh colonists took up this mantle and created Y Wladfa colony there in 1865.

Returning to the 17th Century - Welsh people were active colonists in the Americas during this time - motivated by saving the Welsh language and freedom of religion (especially the developing Nonconformist denominations of Protestant Christianity developing at this time). It was not so much that England was forcing Wales to participate in its colonialism, but that Wales has its own wants and ends for colonialism and was motivated entirely on its own grounds.

Back at home, Wales was still hard-done-by due to England - but two things can be true at once. Wales was a victim of English imperialism, but was also a perpetrator itself of colonial violence against Native Americans. England was no such victim of imperialism of any kind and the power dynamic for England had always been one rooted in absolute expansionism.

Summary and Conclusion:

With all of that said - if you were to ask point blank if I feel it is appropriate or okay for Wales to claim it was colonised by England and that Welsh people are in some way, more indigenous to the island than any other people living here - my answer would be no, I don't think it's okay.

I can't stop people from thinking otherwise, but I can reason that perhaps we shouldn't appropriate the struggles of people marginalised by the very nation we are talking about in order to craft a victimhood which is entirely unnecessary. Wales was a victim of English imperialism - but Wales was also an active colonising European nation. In the modern world, people are thankfully more willing to listen to the wants and needs of victims of colonialism - particularly victims of British colonialism in the Americas, Oceania and Asia. But I would warn against Welsh nationalism which seeks to capitalise on that increase in indigenous visibility in order to add legitimacy to itself (necessitating the crafting of an 'indigenous' narrative which did not exist there before). We live in the modern world where indigenous peoples are being taken more seriously than in centuries past - but that does not mean the only peoples hard-done by being taken seriously are colonised indigenous populations.

I believe it comes from a deep seated insecurity within Wales in which it is not uncommon to feel like Wales is being left behind because of all of this advancement. And this insecurity manifests as rejection of anything not obviously Welsh or demonstrably 'home-grown'. It's the national equivalent of a survival mechanism - but this is detrimental not only to the cause of Welsh nationalism, but to Wales itself. I've had people say to me (and I have read in historical sources from the last 100 years in Welsh) that the LGBTQ+ movement is actually an English invention created to erode Welsh traditional culture. Or variations on that rhetoric in which it is immigrants or other minorities which are made into this boogeyman come to destroy Wales and all Welsh ways of life. And it is so demonstrably not true but also bitter to see from the hearts and minds of my fellow Welsh speakers/Welsh people. Who have been hurt so much by the historical erosion of their culture that they confuse non-threats for threats and can only resolve to obtain some more legitimacy by appropriating the language of nativeness and colonisation in this ever changing world which, right now, is listening to native peoples for once.

It's difficult to put into words, even with all of the background knowledge above - but Wales is valuable and legitimate all on its own and doesn't need to rely upon things which isn't serving it - like ethnonationalism and nativism.

I want to live in a Wales which is uncompromising not only in its own fight for recognition and respect - but for other nations and peoples' fights for the same as well. I want to live in an independent Wales which is an ally to all those who share Wales' struggle and a Wales which rights the wrongs of its past without hesitation or compromise.

Would you rather a Wales for the few or a Wales for all who call it home?

135 notes · View notes

lunaerys-archeron · 1 year ago

Text

THE SHADOW QUEEN

Mainlist | Prologue | Chapter I

(This is based on my book on wattpad)

Daemon Targaryen x OC!(Lunaerys Novak)

For caution, most of this is fictional not included in the books or show!! So there will be more than a few of my original characters that have last names of main characters.

When Aegon the Conqueror and his three sisters came to Conquer what was known as, Westeros, the Seven Kingdoms. There was another Kingdom that was not part of neither of these realms, it was its own entire world. The Kingdom of Adrithe, an own realm built of gold and black steel. The capital was known as Morruk, in which House Novak, the royal family of Adrithe had ruled over their sacred realm. It was said that the people of Adrithe had prayed and worshiped the Gods of the Old Flame, five gods in which created the very first fire, Aellos known as the almighty of all of the Old Flame souls, and sacred oaths. Rhemeros, the goddess of fertility and life. Moruku, the goddess of Seas and Darkness. Orkos, the God of War and Protector of warriors and children, and lastly Lunaeros, the goddess of mischief and eternal death. The legend states that they were siblings, born of the skies, their duty was to create the first fire. The first eternal life.

When the four had came forth to the earth's grounds, they had presented a large land of people their gift, in exchange for their worship and their fair treaties the four gods would present them with fire and protection. During this encounter the gods had chosen a woman to be their sole messenger, she was named, Amaris Novak. The first Queen of Adrithe, the lady of Morruk.

As centuries passed Queen's and King's had came and went, all proudly honoring House Novak.

When Aegon Targaryen, known as the Conqueror of his realms had traveled to Adrithe with his three sisters he had threatened their Kingdom to bend the knee, or they'd face the consequences with the fire of their dragons.

Adrithe's then ruler, King Silas Novak refused to bend the knee to a man who called himself a King for forcing with fear and death.

But Aegon was desperate to have control over what could become a threat to his new Kingdom, the Dragon King offered his only sister he was not wedded, Aelara Targaryen, as Aegon had been married to his other two sisters Visenya and Rhaenys.

However, King Silas refused. For he did not wish to marry a girl ten years his younger, she was only ten and six, and himself twenty and six. He did not want to break the innocence of a young girl who was used as a pawn for her brothers gain, nor did he wish to be stuck in a loveless marriage.

Though King Silas made a deal with Aegon, if he truly wished to go to war then not only would Adrithe go to war but so would Dorne. For Adrithe and Dorne were bound eternally by blood from Silas, as he was of both old flame and dornish blood. Both would gladly go to war for their people. Or, if Aegon never called war against Adrithe, House Targaryen would be welcomed to make trades within their Kingdom.

It was that day, one in which the sun bled blood over its light.

A treaty was sealed in written blood. Adrithe and Westeros would never be at war with one another.

A moons term celebration was thrown, House Novak and House Targaryen joined together as one for days and nights. But twas' on the last night, King Silas had asked Queen Visenya to join him for a dance after he asked her husband. The Dragon and Wolf of the East danced as if they were old lovers.

And that is what they were. Just for one night. Forbidden lovers.

It was three years later, when Silas had sent word for Aegon as they had grown to close friends over their peaceful years since their treaty, Silas Novak was to be married to Alysara Stark. A woman of the cold North, someone he grew to love wholeheartedly. Two wolves of different claims.

It was said that on the night of Silas Novak' wedding to his consort, Queen Alysara Stark. That Visenya had revealed to Silas that her son, Maegor Targaryen, was of blood of both his and her own. Silas did not believe her words, until he saw the young boy run with is brother. Maegor Targaryen was his son. A child born from no marriage. A bastard.

Silas wished to claim Maegor as his own, but Visenya refused. Stating that the Iron Throne was to be his once Aegon passed, and the Iron Throne costed more than a throne made of bones.

More years passed and Silas Novak and Alysara Stark created four children, all boys who resembled their father and mother. For they had their mothers norther hair and sharp features, but wore the golden eyes of their father. News had been shared throughout every single realm known, and when it reached the ears of House Targaryen. Visenya had seethed in anger.

Now that her old lover had children of his own, four, son's at that, and another on the way. Her son Maegor went down the line of Adrithe's succession. For she wanted her son to be King to both Kingdoms.

War breeched when Maegor Targaryen came of age and his brother Aenys had died. He wage war against Adrithe, destroying the treaty his father had once created.

The histories based on this war had stated many different outcomes, but one thing that stayed the same. Visenya Targaryen was the reason for both of her sisters and her sons death. Adrithe and Dorne joined together, their forces to harsh against their dragons, for scorpion blood and viper venom with nightshade killed them painfully but quickly. Aelara and Rhaenys Targaryen died with their dragons. And Maegor died by the hands of his five half-brothers, not knowing they were his blood.

When Jaehaerys Targaryen came to the succeed his uncle as King to the Iron Throne, he tried to make amends with Adrithe once again, to fix what Maegor broke. But Adrithe would no longer find themselves agreeing to another treaty that would one day be broken by a Targaryens' ambition.

Thus, Adrithe and House Targaryen never once again saw eye to eye.

So when King Aelor Novak, the great-grandson of King Silas, received raven from King Jaehaerys Targaryen, in the year 97 a.c. He was shortly surprised and angered at the offer.

For, Jaehaerys had offered his second born grandson, Prince Daemon Targaryen to marry his daughter and heir, Princess Lunaerys Novak.

Would House Novak and House Targaryen finally be joined together as one, as the gods of both the Old Flame and Old Valyria had once intended? Or would they end in another war.

Only Princess Lunaerys and Prince Daemon would decide.

—————————————————————————————————

#daemon targaryen #daemon targaryen x oc #daemon targaryen x reader #daemon targaryen fanfic #rhaenyra targaryen #viserys targaryen #aemma arryn #lunaerys novak #house of the dragon fanfic #house of the dragon #house of the dragon x reader #hotd fanfic #aemond targaryen #aemond targaryen fanfic #house targaryen #house stark #house aellos

174 notes · View notes

justinspoliticalcorner · 2 months ago

Text

Jason Wilson at The Guardian:

Pete Hegseth, Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense, has attacked several key US alliances such as Nato, allied countries such as Turkey and international institutions such as the United Nations in two recent books, as well as saying US troops should not be bound by the Geneva conventions. At the same time, the man who would head America’s gigantic military has tied US foreign policy almost entirely to the priority of Israel, a country of which he says: “If you love America, you should love Israel.” Elsewhere, Hegseth appears to argue that the US military should ignore the Geneva conventions and any international laws governing the conduct of war, and instead “unleash them” to become a “ruthless”, “uncompromising” and “overwhelmingly lethal” force geared to “winning our wars according to our own rules”. Hegseth’s policy preferences may raise concerns about the future of Nato, the escalation of tensions with Israel’s arch-foe Iran, and impunity for US war criminals, such as those who Hegseth persuaded Trump to pardon in his first term. [...]

‘Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded’

While in the more distant past Hegseth was a foreign policy hawk aligned with neoconservatism, since what he has called his “Trump conversion”, he has written scathingly of multilateral institutions. In American Crusade (AC), published in 2020, Hegseth asks bluntly: “Why do we fund the anti-American UN? Why is Islamist Turkey a member of Nato?” Elsewhere in that book, Hegseth disparages the International Security Assistance Force, the UN security council’s peacekeeping force sent to Afghanistan in 2006, with claims based on his own service in Afghanistan: “On my camouflage uniform, I wore an American flag on one shoulder and an Isaf patch on the other,” he writes, adding: “The running joke of US troops in Afghanistan was that the Isaf patch actually stood for ‘I Saw Americans Fighting’.” Like Trump, Hegseth characterizes Nato allies as not paying their way: “Nato is not an alliance; it’s a defense arrangement for Europe, paid for and underwritten by the United States.”

He also embeds criticisms of Nato in apocalyptic, “Great Replacement”-style narratives of European immigration. Hegseth writes at one point in AC: “Europe has already allowed itself to be invaded. It chose not to rebuild its militaries, happily suckling off the teat of America’s willingness to actually fight and win wars.” Hegseth is particularly incensed by the inclusion of Turkey in Nato. He argues that the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, “openly dreams of restoring the Ottoman empire” and is “an Islamist with Islamist visions for the Middle East”.

“The defense of Europe is not our problem; been there, done that, twice,” Hegseth writes, adding: “Nato is a relic and should be scrapped and remade in order for freedom to be truly defended. “This is what Trump is fighting for,” he concludes. The UN, meanwhile, he calls “a fully globalist organization that aggressively advances an anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-freedom agenda. Here’s one set of rules for the United States and Israel, another for everyone else.” On Hegseth’s characterization of Turkey as Islamist – the same descriptor he uses for militant non-state actors such as Isis – Hill said: “It’s extremist rhetoric that’s trying to paint literal treaty allies as illegitimate actors.”

‘If you love America, you should love Israel’

Hegseth’s belief in the UN’s bias against Israel mirrors his deepest apparent commitments: that any vision of international cooperation is rooted in his support of Israel, which at times he couches in religious terms. In a striking passage in AC he presents his support for Israel against as a renewal of medieval crusades. “Our present moment is much like the 11th century,” he writes in AC, adding: “We don’t want to fight, but, like our fellow Christians a thousand years ago, we must. We need an American crusade.” He adds: “We Christians – alongside our Jewish friends and their remarkable army in Israel – need to pick up the sword of unapologetic Americanism and defend ourselves.” Hegseth continues: “For us as American crusaders, Israel embodies the soul of our American crusade – the ‘why’ to our ‘what’.” Hegseth concludes: “Faith, family, freedom, and free enterprise; if you love those, learn to love the state of Israel. And then find an arena in which to fight for her.”

[...]

‘We will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs’

In 2024’s The War on Warriors, Hegseth argues at length that US forces should ignore the Geneva conventions and other elements of international law governing the conduct of war. In the book, Hegseth asks: “The key question of our generation – of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – is way more complicated: what do you do if your enemy does not honor the Geneva conventions? “We never got an answer. Only more war. More casualties. And no victory.” Hegseth’s answer is that the conventions should be ignored. “What if we treated the enemy the way they treated us?” he asks. “Would that not be an incentive for the other side to reconsider their barbarism? Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” He then writes: “We are just fighting with one hand behind our back – and the enemy knows it … If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily and asked to sacrifice more lives so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren’t we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules?!”

He continues: “Who cares what other countries think?” Hill said Hegseth’s rhetoric blamed “liberal ideas” for military defeat in a way that resembled the narratives far-right movements have historically used to scapegoat their political opponents for military defeats.

The Guardian reports on potential Trump Misadministration II Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth wrote in two different books that the US should ignore the Geneva Conventions, launches childish criticisms against NATO, and unapologetically defends Israel’s Apartheid by whining about “anti-Israel” bias against the UN.

#Trump Administration II #Pete Hegseth #Geneva Convention #US Miltary #US Department of Defense #Department of Defense #Israel #United Nations #NATO #American Crusade #Great Replacement Theory #Islamophobia #The War On Warriors

30 notes · View notes