#not because they're good but simply for national solidarity

[grapenehifics]

what mlb team do obikin support?

Anakin, as the child of the American Southwest I am headcanoning him as for this fic, is a lifelong Arizona Diamondbacks fan, and exactly as embarrassed by that fact as you or I would be. However he just likes baseball! When he was at university he attended his school's home games and if he travels he likes to catch a game no matter who's playing. When his team inevitably doesn't make the playoffs, which they don't because see above re: Arizona Diamondbacks, he roots for the NL champion because he's old enough to remember the before-DH times when being a well-rounded athlete actually mattered (whoops author's bias against the DH, how did you get in here??)

Double Header Obi-Wan is slightly embarrassed to admit that he doesn't actually care about sports, baseball very much included. He likes hanging out with his friends when they invite him, and appreciates that, when going to a baseball game as opposed to a movie, you're allowed to chat with your friend and/or date and it doesn't bother anyone. He likes the pageantry of it - the ceremonial first pitch and the songs the batters pick for their at-bats and their little rituals at the plate and the games they play between innings and the groundskeepers who come out to sweep the base paths and deciding what flavor of Dippin' Dots he wants to get from the vendor when they pass by. He loves doing the wave and is perfectly happy to join in and cheer when everyone else is cheering but he doesn't quite get *why* he's doing it but also doesn't care enough to learn. He's just here to have a nice time :)

One time after they get together Anakin decides it would be fun if Obi-Wan got a little more involved so he tried showing him how to keep score - Numbers! Math! He figured Obi-Wan would like that - and Obi-Wan played along for half an inning before offering to make out with Anakin in their seats so long as Anakin promised to never use the phrase 'on-base percentage' in his presence ever again. Anakin, being the easily distractable boy he is, readily agreed.

[nothorses]

With the whole voting shit going on, I've felt incredibly conflicted about voting. But recently, the opinion I've landed on is similar to Kelly Hayes. I am roughly paraphrasing here, but she said that it's incredibly insensitive to ask Arab Americans and Palestinians, people who have outright LOST their family members due to the US's unrestricted military aid to israel and the genocide, to vote. That makes sense to me. I absolutely agree with that, and I don't think it makes sense to yell at these people to vote. BUT, Kelly then goes on to say that the argument that if you're voting, you're got blood on your hands, is just wrong. Because living in America, benefiting from the imperialistic violence, we always had blood on our hands, and no one's breaking solidarity with marginalized folks simply by voting. You break solidarity when you justify your politicians' horrible actions, such as police brutality, prison industrial complex, etc. But in this case, when someone acknowledges these politicans aren't gonna get the real important shit done, only direct action works, and you're voting to choose your opponent--I don't think that's breaking solidarity. Or throwing people under the bus. The truth is even if every leftist didn't engage with electoral politics at all, and spent it on mutual aid, community defense, these things--there would still be a president until we somehow destroy settler nation America. And that president will destroy public infrastructure and attack marginalized folks a lot quicker if he isn't a democrat, because the Republicans are literally just--fascist party.

I dislike people whose only engagement with politics is to vote shame. But I also think it's just a wrong take to act like people who vote, who aren't vote shaming, who do think it's harm reduction, are all idiotic liberals. As we try to mobilize against imperialism, it's crucial to try to pick our enemies when we can. I understand the fact our wealth, the fact we have these healthcare systems, this public ifnrastructure and government assistance even if it's nowhere near enough--it comes from blood of the Global South. And there is a real problem with liberals who care about these elections only to maintain their quality of life, don't care about imperialism and global oppression at all. These people exist, and if we do start dismantling imperialism ina meaningful fashion, USA quality of life will drop. But people voting Democrat because they don't want the Affordable Care Act dismantled, want to keep their food stamps, their schools funded--they're not inherently selfish and breaking solidarity with third world folks. There's nuance here, a lot of nuance. Which is why I like Kelly saying we can't let electoralism destroy our relationships., because we are going to need to build, build, build if we are going to survive. I'm going to vote because ultimately it won't take me much time, but I also won't judge the people who refuse to, choosing to invest their efforts in direct action.

I also think the people who say voting doesn't do anything...they also ignore the nuance. I get it. I get the frustration. But as I read various perspectives, I'm starting to realize the treachery of black-and-white thing. Before there's a revolution, it's more likely we are going to build new things out of the old system, incrementalism, before we make any foundational leap. Again, this shit has nuance.

Yeah, I think this resonates a lot for me. And I'm not really here to "vote shame" either! I think I do have a similar opinion on it to FD Signifier, though, who says he thinks of voting like washing your hands.

You can choose not to, it's not the end of the world. But like. Why? Who is this helping? I mean maybe it's not my business, maybe you have a good reason, whatever. It's just one of those things that, y'know, especially if it takes you 5 minutes to mail a ballot in... it's just good hygiene.

And I think a lot of people say, "put your energy towards these other things instead!" without any intent to actually do so, and without any follow through themselves. And do you really need to not vote in order to do those things? Like is voting the thing preventing you from Doing The Revolution? For real?

At the end of the day, I'm not going to shame anyone for not voting. I talk about it because I think some people are misguided about how all this works, and I think some of the opinions people put out there just, like, suck. But it's ultimately not up to me. 🤷‍♂️

[palant1r]

Week 2: The Right is Right about "Brave New World"

Every so often, some right-wing talking head will state that our current world is just like 1984 or Fahrenheight 451 or Brave New World, the most recent example being Elon Musk. This inevitably results in rightful mockery from Tumblr and Twitter, pointing out that the figure in question likely has not read the books, or if they had, did not understand them. This is, in all cases, likely true. However, I feel like there's an implied corollary in this response: that the reason we can tell that Elon Musk or Ben Shapiro or whoever didn't understand these books is that these books do not actually align with their politics, and they're simply using the surface-level signifiers of dystopia without actually comprehending the actual societal issues the author was taking aim at.

In the case of Brave New World, this is false. Aldous Huxley would be horrified at today's world, and would likely see his dystopian creation mirrored in it. This is because Brave New World is incredibly reactionary.

Dystopia is a very powerful tool for social critique in literature, because it exaggerates the problems the author wishes to highlight to the degree that they cannot be ignored or excused, forcing the reader to confront the true implications of processes or norms they may have come to take for granted. However, this also makes it harder to immediately disagree with the politics compared with a dystopian work, and makes it important to isolate what issues a dystopia is actually taking aim at, and what anxieties such writing stems from.

Brave New World is a progressive dystopia — unlike, say, the Handmaid's Tale, the world Huxley depicts was ruined by progress and new ideas. It's a book that longs for the old world. Its thesis can be summed up by "Reject modernity, embrace tradition," which is an automatic red flag.

I won't go fully into detail as to how I've derived what Brave New World is taking aim at, given that this is just a blog post about my book of the week and not an essay. I shall instead give a numbered list of the things that Aldous Huxley is trying to say that I don't like.

The nuclear, heterosexual, monogamous family is an essential facet of a good and just civilization. Any deviation from that is a modern perversion.

New art is not valuable, and it is dangerous in its valuelessness. The old works of the broader Western canon must be the basis by which we judge the aesthetic and moral value of art.

Conflict and struggle is necessary to form the moral core and solidarity of a nation, and should be elevated to a place of glory. (Yes, this is fascist as hell)

A society cannot be moral and individuals cannot be grounded without God. Modernity leaves no room for God. (The Native Americans in this story worship Jesus, which helps John become Enlightened. It's fucking weird and racist.)

Contraception is a direct agent in the degradation of important sexual norms, and these strict sexual norms are essential for humanity to experience its fullest potential. It's also bad because it deprives women of their natural need for motherhood.

Globalism Bad because World Too Big

Eugenics is bad, not because of any of the actual reasons that eugenics is bad, but because it is New Science and results in the undermining of what is natural

What is natural is good.

The arrival of radio and other new forms of storytelling represents the dearth of societal intellectual development

When the masses are given control, they will clamor for happiness instead of fulfillment

There's absolutely more wild reactionary stuff in Brave New World, but I'm not in the mood to fully analyze it. My point is, I'm starting to realize how much I've internalized the idea that classic dystopias are taking aim at the modern realizations of the things they criticize, rather than contemporary anxieties about modernity. It's important to remember that just because an author wrote a popular social critique doesn't mean they have a monopoly on what is Bad in society.

And when conservatives cite Brave New World as proof of modern society's degeneracy, yeah sure, it's fun to dunk on them for not reading it. But I need to make sure I don't fall into the trap of arguing that they're wrong because they didn't read the book — even if they read and totally understand the book, I do not want the direction of society to be shaped by Aldous Huxley. Modern conservatives are not misinterpreting Huxley's work. They are the modern custodians of the worldview it represents.

[recreationaldivorce]

As a fellow communist music enjoyer, why do you think communist music is so fucking good compared to other political music

i mean idk about compared to other political music... not like i'm listening to fascist music or liberal music or whatever. idk if they make good music. idek what liberal music would be. taylor swift? the hamilton soundtrack? the billy bragg internationale?

so i won't make the claim that communist music is inherently Better than other political music, except insofar as communism is better than reactionary politics, because honestly i imagine that what communist music does musically is also possible for other politics to do musically?

but why do i think communist music is good, i think just bc it is sincere and profound for those who create it, and that passion transfers into the art they create. i don't think there's a singular communist essence imbued into communist music. a lot of it is about hope of a better world, but equally some of it (which is also good) is about resistance in hopeless situations, and equally some of it is just pure anger about the existing state of things (hope-neutral if you will). i think regardless of what form communist politics take within music, it's generally from a sincere place of how the artist feels, and tends to not feel manufactured the way other non-political music can feel.

i also think that part of it relates to the role of music in resistance. like how you hear stories about striking workers being arrested and singing solidarity forever and even though they're being housed in separate cells they can hear their fellow workers singing in the other cells. the purpose of a lot of communist music is morale in the face of persecution, morale when the capitalist's boot is on your neck, etc, so yeah music for that purpose has to be powerful and moving in order to serve its purpose.

and again i don't really think that's specific to communism per se... i mean i imagine fascist music would also be imbued with a lot of sincere feeling (that being patriotism/national pride/racial pride) and written with the purpose of inspiring listeners to political action. and it's not like communists are the only political group to have been persecuted before so the point about morale in the face of repression probably applies to other political music. i dunno though maybe all the reactionary music is also sonically bad i simply have not listened to it lol

[matan4il]

I'll start by fully agreeing with the last part. There's nothing wrong with defending Palestinians or wanting human rights and dignity for them (and that to me includes rejecting Palestinian extremism. You can't wish well on the Palestinians, while endorsing the extremist ideology and violence that brought tragedy upon them repeatedly).

As for my take on anti-Zionist Jews...

To be clear: I am distinguishing people who are critical of the Jewish state/its government, from people who claim the Jewish state has no right to exist at all. The former can be Zionists in my experience, and have totally legit criticism (in fact, I don't think I've ever met an Israeli Jew who hasn't criticized at least one Israeli government, so to de-legitimize criticism of the government would ironically mean de-legitimizing all Israeli Jews).

Anti-Zionism is denying the very right of Jews to have a state of their own in their ancestral land.

So, I do believe anti-Zionism goes against a core value of Judaism (because while Judaism does encourage debate and multiple interpretations, there are some core values that can't be argued. And if you do, then what you're advocating for is no longer Judaism. For example, a core element of Judaism is the belief in one God. We can argue about his nature, or how we worship him, but the second you erase that core value, it's no longer Judaism. Another core value is that every human is made in God's image, and therefore every life is equal and sacred. Again, we can argue about what does "in God's image" mean, how does the right to self defence, which does exist in Judaism, play into this and so on, but this is a core value of Judaism and cannot be disputed. If you do, you're no longer speaking about Judaism. Similarly, Judaism IS Zionist as part of its core elements. It's a native religion and identity which binds Jews to Israel, and the wish for a Jewish state is built on this part of our identity, so to claim that Zionism is incompatible with Judaism or external to it, is simply to distort Judaism), and that anti-Zionism is also inherently a form of discrimination against Jews (why does everyone else deserve a state, but not Jews? Why is it okay to be pro-Palestine, which is basically being for Palestinian nationalism, but somehow awful to want the same thing for Jews? Notice, this is now about what's perceived as a universal human right, and therefore the freedom of debate within Judaism is not relevant to the fact that anti-Zionism discriminates against Jews).

So, I personally don't feel like I can say that anti-Zionism is okay even on just the abstract level, before we get to the many ways it is in practice used to harm Jews.

I do believe, however, that another core value of Judaism is Jewish solidarity. Which means I stand by ALL Jews. Even anti-Zionist ones. I think they're mistaken, I'm afraid of the harm they're capable of causing Zionist (meaning: the majority of) Jews, I'm bothered by the way they no longer feel committed to that core value of Jewish solidarity, I fear that very often there's a lot of ignorance and internalized antisemitism at play (and it could be that they don't even realize it), but they are still my siblings. I will still care about them deeply. I will wish good things for them (including for them to realize they're being exploited by antisemitic non-Jews, and stop allowing themselves to be used as pawns by such people, while throwing other Jews under the bus). And if anyone dares try to harm them as Jews, I will fight for them no less than I will fight for any other Jew.

Given all of this, it's not a surprise that they often can't call out leftist antisemitism (not always, I've seen some of them try). Their whole stance is an off shoot of that type of hatred against Jews, so it is VERY difficult to call out leftist antisemitism, while maintaining the belief that's born from it. Even when they try to call it out... I've seen posts saying stuff like, "Here's how to be anti-Zionist without being antisemitic," and the issue with those, is that they're like instruction manuals on how to better disguise the antisemitism of the left. It doesn't really address the main reasons that anti-Zionism is inherently antisemitic, and therefore these posts end up only dealing with appearances. For example, they encourage people not to compare Zionist Jews to the Nazis because that's harmful and antisemitic, but they never tackle the question of why anti-Zionists are so happy to make that offensive and unfounded comparison to begin with, or face the fact that the Nazis were, in a sense, anti-Zionist themselves. When Eichmann secretly visits the Land of Israel under the British Mandate in 1937, he returns to Germany incredibly worried about the possibility that even if the Jewish community in Israel will be the only one to survive, it constitutes such a revival of Jewish life in the Jewish ancestral land, that the whole Jewish People might be re-built from this community alone... Accordingly, the Nazis proceed to devise plans on how to make sure the Jews in Israel are exterminated as well, and as part of that, they even collaborate with (and pay a monthly salary to) Haj Amin al-Husseini, a Palestinian religious extremist leader, to make sure the Jewish pre-state Israeli community will be wiped out.

I am grateful and in awe to have learned that there are Jews, who used to be anti-Zionist, but actually listened to other Jews, discovered which parts of their own identity had been distorted or denied by anti-Zionists, and re-claimed them. I figure it's like members of other marginalized groups re-discovering their roots. It's painful that that was taken from them in the first place, but it's beautiful to know they get to have their heritage once again.

so much antisemitism comes from pop culture insisting being jewish is JUST a religion and you can’t convince me otherwise.

[writerfae]

Project: Secret Warriors - more facts

world building:

P:SW takes place in the future of an alternate world similar to ours

there once was a big ass war that killed a majority of the world's population and the surviving humans split up into four nations

the names of these four great nations are Nnedor, Onest, Sedun and Wenset

those are simply anagrams of the German words for the four compass points Norden (North), Osten (East), Süden (South), Westen (West) (wasn't really creative with this one, I know, but it's not that important for the story anyway)

they're at peace with each other, but the situation is pretty tense

life in Nnedor isn't really great, there are many poor people, people living on the streets, orphans, criminal gangs etc.

the project:

like I said, it's a training camp

they pick up homeless and convicted teens and offer them a chance to take part in the project

not because the government is being so generous and they want to help, but rather because "no one would miss them"

cause, as I also already mentioned, they use them as test subjects for creating super-soldiers and that doesn't always work out well (people die or go mad or get hurt and stuff, not great)

they still try to figure out how to make super-soldiers (no there do not exist super humans in their world but they try to create some), right now they work on developing a special serum

the teenagers don't know about any of this, they are just told that they get trained to serve their country in case of a war. as a secret army you could say, hence the project's name

which is true, just with the tiny little extra fact that this secret army is supposed to be made of super-soldiers

the teens get normal military training but from time to time they are called to "the lab" for "health checks" and stuff like that

characters:

Nalia and Xander are the two main (and POV) characters, two siblings who lived on the streets for a year

Xander is the older one (cause I have a thing for older brothers), he's 17 (nearly 18) and more of a guarded guy, kinda awkward sometimes and always the voice of reasons, he's also a very talented artist

his sister Nalia is 15 and the complete opposite, she's outgoing and reckless and she likes to have action in her life, she's very good at sports

those two are peak wlw/mlm solidarity between siblings

Charlie is the third main character, he's 18, dyes his hair blue, he's charismatic, a little rebellious and likes to mess with people. or flirt with them. He grew up in several orphanages (his mother gave him away when he was a baby) and lived a majority of his life on the streets (running away from said orphanages)

Charlie is also a chaotic bisexual

the siblings and Charlie met at the start of the project, Charlie and Xander are roommates

there are several other teenagers that play a role in the story, the most important ones are: Rafael, Alissa and Ethan

Rafael is one of the most skilled fighters at camp, he befriends Nalia (because she activates his big brother drive)

Alissa is Nalia's roommate and a friend of Charlie, she'll help out the main three

Ethan is one of the not so nice teenagers, he and Charlie have a troubled relationship (because of a shared backstory), he'll cause problems, that much you should know

but the real villains are the leader of the project: defense secretary Darcia Morgan (called "the boss" by everyone else) and the Professor Dr. Quentin Harvey

.

wip intro

tag list: @thewalkingnerdx

[hondacivictrucknuts]

If I had to pick somebody to call the William F. Buckley of my generation it would be Julius Krein. He makes a good point:

The media echo chamber which now insists that Trump will be a titanic political force for years to come sounds increasingly similar to the one that, five years ago, claimed he was no more than a flash-in-the-pan celebrity candidate. The glaring underestimation of Trump in the past and probable overestimation of his prospects today actually stem from the same error: the belief that Trump’s political appeal rests mainly on his personality cult, not on any association with a certain set of policy arguments.

Trump did not win the presidency in 2016 simply because he had a cameo in Home Alone 2 and an uncanny talent for Twitter. He also outlined a wide-ranging, if inchoate, critique of the bipartisan policy consensus that had dominated American politics since the end of the cold war: a failed combination of “neoliberal” economics at home and military adventurism abroad. Moreover, Trump’s critique was based on national interests rather than the (often treacly) left-liberal moralism of progressive Democrats, thus scrambling ideological categories and establishing himself as a candidate with a unique appeal among key constituencies.

That last sentence is important.

Socialism never took root in America because American socialists are such fucking faggots. That seems to be an important difference between us and, say, France. It turns out the real solidarity movement here is big on pickup trucks and Lee Greenwood, and they see foreign competition in all forms as a greater threat than capitalist exploitation. I think they're right, but that's beside the point; in a democracy they get a voice.

Joe Biden may be the second-least neoliberal president of my lifetime, what with the job-is-more-than-a-paycheck shtick. His 2016 campaign, like his two previous, was based on the first thirty years of his biography, from his father's "longest walk up the stairs" to his hospital bedside oath of office. Why did it finally resonate with primary voters? Was Elizabeth Warren that much worse than Michael Dukakis? Or was that July NYT spread about The Jobs We Need Now part of a broad realization that GDP is less important than, say, the economic opportunities sufficient to family formation available to men in their twenties?

My experience suggests that very few of my fellow leftists will reflect on the last four years and think how cool it is that Trump did so many things we wanted while simultaneously making them more popular.

Few in the American media, left or right, will find it worth their while to point out that things are going well and people mostly agree about the important stuff.

In such times, we are fortunate to have an aristocratic young writer of uncompromising boldness. I wish Mr. Krein and everyone else unimaginable blessings in 2021.

[loosesodamarble]

Girl... I'm...

That.

That's me right now.

BECAUSE OF THIS CHAPTER!

Nozel and Fuegoleon were just standing there! That's all they could do besides wonder if their wives went through with destroying the gates. They said goodbye and don't even know for certain if the ladies ensured that nothing could pass through, giving them as much defense as possible. That'd for sure drive the men crazy with worry!

But Fuegoleon and Nozel are themselves and they manage to hold themselves together. They act composed while in each other's presence. I'm sure neither wants to be the one to break in front of the other. Not out of pride but solidarity. They both had to say goodbye to their wife and at least one unborn child. Like, they both know this is not the time to be prideful and petty. They're just being sympathetic to their shared loss and I'm askjhlkashtiurhst! 😭😭😭

Bro, not the empty frame! With how things are as they are in this chapter, there's a feeling that it'll never get drawn. 😭

Fuegoleon and Nozel eventually part ways. While they both share their loss, neither are really in the mood to be so vulnerable as to talk out their feelings.

And Fuegoleon walks to his room in hallways. Hallways that feel emptier and colder simply because Solara is not walking through those halls. The imagined scenarios of the future are... Oh man, honest, that's when I started to tear up while reading. It really hit me how much Fuegoleon had been anticipating the future and was now missing said future. Because Lucius came along to screw everyone over.

When the house is no longer a "home" vibes...

Fuegoleon... drinking to drown his sorrows... Sir, no... He's really broken up. So broken...

Fuegoleon's thoughts... They're sent spiraling. Because of the loss and grief and I suppose a bit of alcohol. He works so hard for Clover and for what? For his dismemberment to be basically ignored in the eyes of justice? To have to send away the love of his life as one of Clover's rulers comes back as a threat to peace?

It's not everything everything, but it's far more than one would want to lose for the sake of their nation. It's also very personal things to a person, their body and intimate connections. So, to me, Fuegoleons rage is somewhat justified.

And it's heartbreaking to see that Fuegoleon isn't so overcome by his emotions and drunkenness. He retains some control and holds back from damaging anything that's meant for Solara and his kids. Because Fuegoleon has already lost them physically. He can't also lose the remnants of their presence in the home, the things holding emotions and memories of them...

This freaking chapter...

Each time I think your writing can't hurt me anymore, Laura, you prove me wrong. But it's a good pain.

What a note to end this book on...

Chapter 51:Fuegoleon and Nozel have left their goodbyes. And now they grieve. The chapter is focused on Fuegoleon

Tag list: @succulentsunrise​ @loosesodamarble​

Keeping in mind that this series contains themes and topics some may find uncomfortable, which is why reader discretion in advised. This chapter includes depressive themes, misuse of alcohol, is heavy angst, wrecking a room, a lot of metaphorical uses of death related motifs, implied depression and rather descriptive falling into depression (at least implied depression because it’s more so intended to be grief, but still), the theme of loss

Length: ~3.0k

Chapter 51: A dream

Keep reading