#like i feel like that sentiment is usually posted by an informed anarchist and then spread by shithead libs

[barrymccaulkinem]

"if your vision of justice is killing the right people you're just calling for mob rule and all its potential atrocity" true and obvious, yes

but i feel like ppl are trying to twist this into saying that we can make it to a life worth living where we can prevent a lot of harm before it ever occurs without killing some people along the way, and thats fucking asinine

[missnight0wl]

So I have some problems with our conversation with Dumbledore in Y6Ch4.

First of all, it happened way too late. It’s pretty clear at this point that MC is building emotional boundaries to deal with their situation: by focusing on helping their friends and all kind of different activities. There was a point when those boundaries were thinner due to shock from the Portrait Vault, and this was when they should’ve broken. But now, after the fifth year’s ending, after two months of summer, and all the things that happened already in the sixth year? They have so much to cut themselves off with. I’m sorry, but the whole sentimental chit-chat with the Headmaster was totally meaningless at this point, in my opinion.

Another thing, it was painfully simplified. I know that it’s just a mobile game, and for most of the time, I really enjoy it despite its limitation. But MC’s emotional state is something deserving more attention and effort. At least let us talk about different aspects separately.

Finally, Dumbledore is really not the right person for that kind of conversation. Seriously. And two of his reactions are actually something I want to focus on.

First, the option “I’m angry” where Dumbledore in his reply said this:

Is Rakepick a manipulator? Yes. A master manipulator, though? Nah, not really. Let’s start from the beginning. Did she really manipulate anyone to get back to Hogwarts? Well, no. Unless you want to say that she became a world-famous Curse-Breaker with that goal in mind… I don’t even think we can suspect she was the one to tamper with the first Vault to put it all in motion. Because then, why she let Dumbledore search for her for such a long time? Whether she didn’t want to be found or it was something not depending on her, she didn’t put much effort into coming back.

She manipulated Dumbledore into hiring her as a DADA professor? Cool, maybe. But so what? She was already at Hogwarts in year 4. She had enough power from the Headmaster that she could give us house points. She needed that teacher position like a fish needs a bicycle. Heck, I still don’t understand why she took it as it was more of an inconvenience for her.

I’m sorry, but I also have a hard time saying MC followed her with the Portrait Vault. We were doing the same thing as in the previous years – Rakepick basically happened to be around. And while she kind of manipulated us into searching for the Marauder’s Map (still don’t know why), she was also the one to inform us about the vault portrait that we needed either way. If not for her, we’d probably spend the same time on figuring out the portrait thing as we wasted on the Map.

She didn’t even use the trust she had with Merula and Bill in her advantage. I don’t get why she didn’t try to use it in the Vault. For example, MC opens the door, they want to go inside, but Rakepick says it’s too dangerous and she’ll go alone first. MC protests, but Bill and Merula supports Rakepick. The quarrel ends with Patricia knocking out everyone. Anything. Merula threw some minor tantrum in Y5Ch29, but Bill? Rakepick could’ve easily used his admiration and told him something like: “MC doesn’t trust me, maybe you could talk to them?”. Yet, we didn’t get any hints something like that had happened. Sure, he was always open about trusting her, but he also didn’t try to change MC’s mind. And you know what? Neither did Rakepick. Until the very last private conversation, she was making sure we don’t trust her.

This screams: “Do not trust me!”. How is it manipulative? I mean, was she hoping for the effect of reverse psychology? Moreover, the game doesn’t even let us declare that we trust her (there were some situations like that, but I believe the last one was like in the first half of the fifth year). On the contrary, we got this in Y5Ch28, for example:

Sure, it’s said by Merula who is terrible at judging people, but still – we couldn’t disagree with her. The game basically forces MC - as a character - into not trusting Rakepick.

Really, they could’ve at least made MC give her something beneficial for her. I can’t count the Portkey here because we all used it. And the only thing that Patricia actually manipulated MC to get and that should be really important for her – the Gillyweed/Coral key – she left behind! She knew it’d be important in the last vault, she said she was looking for it for a long time! Why she didn’t take it with her? I don’t think she was planning to go back to the castle after killing us all. And if Sickleworth was supposed to bring it to her, it was an awfully risky decision. She knew the Niffler is fond of MC so of course he’d give us the key if we happened to encounter him earlier.

Oh, and there’s the Legilimency issue. It was the only reason Rakepick needed MC, right? Great, but then why we learnt about it from Dumbledore and Snape? Patricia didn’t even mention such skill around MC before. So what, I’m supposed to assume that she made someone else inform about it and teach us? All right, then I could maybe call her “a master manipulator”, but also – it’s only on you, Albus. Don’t say “We all were tricked”.

Honestly, at this point, I don’t know anymore if they failed miserably at making her a criminal mastermind, and they have to keep telling us that now, or they failed at it on purpose…

But I digressed. Let’s go back to Dumbledore.

If you choose the option “I’m afraid”, MC ends their answer with this:

To which Dumbledore replies:

And I have to say… 

You old prick. HOW DARE YOU TELL A TERRIFIED CHILD THAT THEY SHARE MANY QUALITIES WITH A CRIMINAL WHO BETRAYED THEM?! 

And no, the addition of “you can choose a different path” doesn’t change shit. You just can’t say that without elaboration, for fuck’s sake! Because MC and Rakepick are nothing alike! Every similarity they share only stress out how much different they are. They’re both ambitious? Sure. MC from the beginning is motivated by finding their brother. Rakepick though, who knows by what, but everything points out now that those are selfish reasons. They’re willing to break rules? Cool. MC does it to help their brother, Rakepick is an anarchist (or whatever). They’re powerful and talented? Check. Too bad MC is hella modest about that in comparison, usually pointing out they have the help of their friends and still much to learn. Rakepick is boastful and arrogant.

THIS IS what MC needed to hear. Not that they “share many qualities”! God… Also, I know I wrote the whole post saying that MC and Rakepick might be indeed more similar than it seems, but I really doubt that it’s what Dumbledore had in mind. And even if, MC couldn’t figure it out on their own.

Now, I see why MC might be afraid they’re like Rakepick. After all, she was comparing them herself. Although, it’s another weird thing about the whole resemblance issue. Patricia was insisting on that in year 4 on a few occasions, but then she sort of… just stop? Even before year 5, I think. To be honest, I’d say she accepted that MC is different than her, and maybe even encourage that.

Remember when Merula was supposed to teach us the Killing Curse?

Rakepick is not surprised here, she’s not annoyed. This situation was always about making Merula feel special, not about MC – because Patricia knows them. She didn’t just predict that because MC refused to learn Crucio. She wasn’t expecting them to want to learn that either. She’s a smart woman, she can judge her apprentices.

Now let’s take a look at Y5Ch29:

And sure, it’s followed by the ominous:

… but if you ask me, she also says here that MC is the only one capable of making reasonable and independent decisions. And considering how Rakepick is an independent woman herself, I can’t see how she wouldn’t see it as the advantage (no, I won’t accept she’s genuinely content or flattered by Merula blindly agreeing with her).

That being said, I don’t quite understand why she said in the Portrait Vault that MC is obsessed with the Cursed Vaults just like her (so not because of finding Jacob). MC stresses all the time that it’s all for their brother, the game doesn’t really give us a chance to hint there might be something more to that. Even if she wanted to mess with MC, it’s probably the worst possible argument as it couldn’t be more clear it’s not true. She could’ve mentioned MC using and manipulating their friends as the resemblance between them (which she kind of did back in year 4 in Filch’s office).

Anyway, Dumbledore is doing terribly at being supportive, and I have to laugh seeing lines like this:

Honestly, I’d rather have this conversation with Flitwick, for example. Not only he happens to be my Head of House, but even this aside, he helped us possibly the most from the faculty. MC goes to him for advice pretty often, and it’s usually at least a little helpful. In my opinion, talking about our emotional state with him would be a bit less meaningless than it was with Dumbledore.

[answershape8-blog]

The Spectre of City Hall

So the official encampment of OccupyLA has come & gone. And the bail has been set at an exorbitant, but unsurprising $5,000. La Opinion informs us that some people have set-up shop down the street at la Placita Olvera, and the HuffPost says that some “occupiers” tried to reconvene at the Corn Fields but were pretty quickly rebuffed by the LAPD.

As many have mentioned, the eviction flew in the face of a pending court injunction to stall the eviction (though the judge later ruled it “meaningless”). Since I am never surprised that politicians, bankers, and other powerful actors in our society use the law solely for their benefit, it does surprise me when others are surprised:

8:21 pm, Lucero:  [INTRODUCES OUR ‘SOLIDARITY CLAP’]. We are Occupy LA and our First Amendment rights are being trampled on and that’s what we are standing up for. [Occupy LA “minutes,” source]

Not that I feel there should be no indignation, but as a person who has had a wealth of personal experience, and extra-personal experience with the police, courts, and the general power-structure : I know that the law is a tool for social control and not a just conferrer of justice. Mayor Villaraigosa says that (amongst other reasons), the encampment had to be shut down because he’s worried about the children. Seriously? This is the best he could come up with?

With the reality regarding the national collusion of local police departments and the Department of Homeland Security, we can very easily see that Mayor Villaraigosa is likely to be just a pawn in a national plan. The fact that some in the ‘occupation’ were won over by his handing out ponchos a month ago should take a note from history and note that the extended hand of the government is usually a ploy to assure submissiveness and the reification of the validity of their power. Wasn’t the Occupy Wall St. movement supposed to exist outside of State power? It was supposed to be, at least according to anarchist anthropologist David Graeber.

Soon into the ‘occupation’ there seemed to be a strong desire to work in collaboration with the city government. At this point it seemed like the ‘occupation’ did not need to be co-opted, they were taking it upon themselves. I sometimes feel that those who first got involved with OccupyLA did not understand that the very nature of an ‘occupation’ (as in the reclaiming of public space/buildings, not the imperialist kind) is by its very nature an ‘illegal’ operation. It assumes that private property is null & void when the commons have been so deprived to necessitate the occupation, a sort of Temporary Autonomous Zone. This is what happened in California with occupations undertaken by students, workers in the UC system in 2009 in response to tuition increases & budget cuts. They demanded nothing because they made the radical leap that posited the university administration as null & void; they became the university because the university was not meeting their needs & desires.

OccupyLA never seemed to have made such a radical leap (though I’m sure some in the encampment wanted to). It seemed they were more concerned with single-issue oriented campaigns against ‘government corruption,’ ‘greedy banks,’ or ‘eliminating the Fed.’ Although Occupy Wall Street began with the Situationist-inspired “Demand Nothing,” OccupyLA seemed ready to put out a list of grievances: an act which only further legitimizes the current order as something that need only be tinkered with, reformed, redressed. As it also seems that OccupyLA was infiltrated by the LAPD, all of this (combined with a general cop-loving) sentiment should come to no surprise.

From the first (& only) time I attended the Occupy LA General Assembly I had a sour taste in my mouth. Members were putting to task the fact that there was active collaboration with the police at almost every step of the way by the “Security Committee,” and that it should thus be dissolved. Some in the GA could not understand why being surrounded by even “peaceful” LAPD officers could be intimidating to the “99%” they so desired to bring into the fold. A sentiment I often feel is that those that have never dealt with the police are the only ones who trust the police: most of us know better.

It seems that the next radical action in the LA area may be the participation of a Westcoast shutdown of the ports, as was undertaken by Occupy Oakland in their general strike. I can only hope I’ll see you there:

Related posts:

D.R.E.A.M. Graduation at City Hall

AM Drive

DREAM Act Town Hall meeting this Thursday

Special Public Meeting to Determine the Future of the City

I can’t breathe!!! The Inconvenient Truth of the trash problem in the inner city.

Source: http://laeastside.com/2011/12/the-spectre-of-city-hall/