#racism oppression of native people

[every-sanji]

[trans-androgyne]

The way some groups of fellow marginalized people will genuinely think it’s okay to imagine themselves as The Most Oppressed Ever is awful. Theories and ideas I otherwise thoroughly support will be soured for me by finding out they think their oppression is objectively “worse” than that of other marginalized groups. We can discuss how marginalized groups’ intersectional experiences are different and how they can support one another. We should not be weighing racism vs. misogyny vs. ableism vs. anything else. Looking at “if [x group] were liberated everyone would be” and “[y oppression] is the root of all evils in the world” sentiments which I have seen almost word for word.

[tricksterkisses]

you are white, wdym "patriarchy does nothing for poc men"? First of all "people of color men" is not a term, it'd be men of color, second of all, 😂 WHAT? Who do you think perpetuates gemdered violence in non white countries and spaces? Men of color do benefit from patriarchy. Not the same as white men in white countries but that is a delusional argument.

You are white is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. I am indeed (mostly, if you're ignorant) white passing, congrats, racist.

My mother is Norwegian/First Nations My father is Salvadoran/First nations.

Also I'm sowwy if my spelling isn't perfect, english isn't my first language, it's my third, but laugh it up.

(this is also racist btw, making fun of ESL speakers for being imperfect at a language when you probably don't even speak any of my languages is like, it's racist, it is literally just racism)

@velvetvexations

This is just like that time that white person tried to whitesplaine my culture to me in that server we're in LMAO

[aworldofyou]

Studying of the Irish suffering for both Wanahton because his wife is Irish ( hello @paddyfuck ) and their home would absolutely be ridiculed for it along with he himself being a Sioux man, and then for Molly O’Shea, looks a lot like:

[creepykuroneko]

Whenever I see asian, brown, and/or black Americans reinforcing, supporting, and upholding racism, colonization, imperialism, colorism, and any other belief system that not only harms them directly but other non-white communities as well and they still want to claim that they themselves are POC and face discrimination I feel bitter disgust towards them.

[marzipanandminutiae]

today's Historical WTF of the Morning:

in 1840, a group of Comanche rode into San Antonio for a peace meeting with white colonists. they had brought back 14-year-old Matilda Lockhart, previously kidnapped in a raid, to be ransomed back to her family. the girl's ransom was paid, Colonel Hugh McLeod interviewed her and remarked on her intelligence, her aunt Catherine attested to her release in a letter to a relative, having earlier written that she heard the captives were being "kindly treated" and writing nothing in her later account to contradict this, and that was the end of her part in the story

(which ended in a "fight" with 35 of the 65 Comanche in the party being killed including 2 children, and 29 being taken prisoner. seven Texians died as well, and while later claims held that the attack on the Comanche was justified because they seemed insufficiently trustworthy in their promise to return more prisoners, the actual situation in the Council House that day remains unclear)

in 1895, Mary Maverick- who, by the account of her own diary on that day, had been at home when fighting broke out at the meeting -claimed she had been the one to tend Lockhart, and that the girl had been gang-raped showed extensive signs of torture including her nose being burned off

something that. um.

I think would have come up in contemporary reports? maybe? that's pretty conspicuous and people would have noticed? especially her aunt, since that is decidedly not being Kindly Treated?

there was a news article from 1840 in Houston claiming that Lockhart had been burned and beaten, and that her hair had been torn out, but no mention of facial disfigurement is made. and again, contemporary sources from people who definitely 100% saw her when she was released don't mention ANY outward signs of abuse AT ALL. I found a description of her release from 1884 that doesn't mention the nose-burning, either- it seems like that was only introduced to the narrative in the 1890s "memoir"

like, look. I'm not saying no white person taken captive by Native Americans was ever mistreated. they're human beings, and human beings can do terrible things to other people regardless of demographic group, or macro-level oppression. some Native people did terrible things to other Native people long before Europeans got here, and it's dehumanizing to treat them like magical perfect fantasy elves or whatever. and it's possible Matilda Lockhart had injuries covered by her clothing, or later revealed abuse she suffered that didn't show marks, and that got dramatized into her missing nose or hair

but. I don't know. it's just galling that not only was this girl who went through, at minimum, the trauma of being taken prisoner as a child was reduced to a symbol in a much larger conflict, but also we once again have the employment of Someone Abused A White Woman/Girl So Whatever We Do To This Entire Demographic Group Is Justified narrative

(which is, as always, employed by people who don't give an actual shit about the lives of the women they use to justify racism. unless Lockhart had lived to be like 80, she'd still never have had franchise or- and even then, STILL not full human rights in her own country. and the people who wanted to use her as a symbol to justify racism probably would have fought tooth and nail to keep her from getting them)

[dalishious]

I know you mentioned it but do you know why there's all this hate for elves in the fandom? Whenever I ask it's because there's "too much content about elves" but I recall hearing the same thing back when Origins and 2 were out. That the elves were annoying and people hated them. And now that its revealed the elven gods were "just slave owners" according to them, it's somehow okay that the current day elves are oppressed? it's WEIRD. they justify it by saying there's too much elf content now.

Yeah it's super hard to guess why certain people hate a minority-coded group. //sarcasm

In all seriousness, I can't tell you how many arguments against elves I've heard from the Dragon Age fandom that are just echoes of anti-Native racism I've heard in real life. "They whine too much about being oppressed" and "they're racist against humans" grinds my gears especially.

[rubberduckyrye]

I'd like to point to interpretation that Angie isn't portrayal of a native Polynesian islander because almost all the evidence around her character and what she says suggests she's not living in a village that has cult-like practices, but that she is in a straight up cult and is unaware of it. It explains a lot of stuff from the odd monotheism, why her "village" seems to only employ seemingly dark web shipping company, the police apparently bothering her "village" or her having an English name.

Referencing this Ask

I mean. That is one interpretation, sure, but to deny the fact that Angie is heavily coded to be Polynesian/Native Hawaiian is unfortunately ignoring the problem. Which is the problem I am trying to address itself.

Right in her promotional art, you can see that Angie is carving a statue--and it heavily resembles a tiki statue. Specifically this kind of Tiki Statue. Though since it is unfinished, it could be a full body version, but I digress.

She also mentions living on an island.

And the "natural disaster" that made the island smaller--that is probably heavily inspired by how Hawaii was used by US military and bombed frequently--which, naturally, made the islands smaller.

She also greets people in Salmon mode with "Alola," which is a reference to Pokemon Sun and Moon, which has it's main location heavily based off of Hawaii. Alola is a butchered way of saying "Aloha", which is a Hawaiian greeting.

Also, Angie having an English name matches with historical oppression in Hawaii. Where Hawaiians were forced to name their children with Christian White names and their Hawaiian names be their middle names. It was literally a law, at least, according to Wikipedia, for quite some time. (The fact that this is not easily verifiable is the very reason why having this discussion is so important--and why people need to stop trying to avoid the conversation.)

I understand the desire to want to dismiss the fact that she is a racist caricature because it sucks to enjoy a character who is one. I get it. However--trying to deny the fact that she is heavily coded to be Native Hawaiian/Polynesian is just sweeping the racism under the rug, and is a major problem when you have people like me who want to discuss the topic and how one should handle rectifying the canon narrative's bigotry.

The mere fact that she is so heavily coded to be Native Hawaiian/Polynesian makes the whole cult thing part of the racist caricature. Indigenous people (especially Indigenous Polynesian cultures) are subject to extreme racist stereotypes that include human sacrifices and savagery--and while Angie's culture isn't developed in canon enough to know for sure if it was truly as savage as, say, the King Kong Indigenous folk, the cult behaviors are a sort of "cousin" to that savagery. We as a society see human sacrifices as barbaric, as savage, and even when in a cult setting, we still present these topics in that fashion.

I'm sorry, anon--but I'm going to ask you only this one time to not derail the conversation I'm trying to start. I understand that there are interpretations that help explain away the bigotry--and this is one legitimate way to deal with bigotry in canon media, or so I've been told--but what I want is a full blown discussion on the subject. I don't want people trying to tell me "Oh b-b-but she can't be a racist Caricature, because (X)!" Because that is dismissing the problem to begin with.

This is a problem. This is a discussion about racism in V3's narrative. There is no getting around it--no matter how much you explain away the writing with headcanons and theories, these problems are still here.

So please stop trying to sabotage my desire for a discussion.

I'm going to note that I LOVE Angie as a character. I think that, when you remove the racism in her character stories, you have a very interesting and compelling female character of color who's intelligence rivals that of the smartest V3 characters. These aspects of her character I adore--but to ignore the racism, for me, is to just turn away from the problem and, in turn, contribute to the racist way fandom treats these kinds of characters.

So let me speak. Let me find people who will talk to me about it. Let me grow and learn. Please, for the love of god, let me learn.

[bucephaly]

Hi, um. I am very confused by this: why would people lie about being Cherokee? I'm white, I don't mean to overstep here, I just kind of flashed back to my History of Native Americans class and from what I can tell, being Native means a shit ton of mistreatment in the past and present, a lot of absolutely absurd stereotypes, weird fetishization and creepy dehumanizing language. My great grandfather was Cherokee and he hid that pretty consistently because he knew it was going to be an obstacle to his education, his career and basically his life in general. While some digging into genealogy later confirmed it was legit, I kind of already knew from the start because people don't usually lie about something they forbid you from mentioning outside the family and which they knew would take them from "one of the brightest minds in your field" to "[insert comment about being One Of The Good Ones here]". So why would someone lie about this? It feels like that'd backfire pretty hard given how racist everyone was/is in the US. I'm not doubting it happens - people are jackasses who'll lie about most things - but I just flat-out don't get why it happens. Why, of all the lies to pick, would someone go with a lie about their ethnicity? I know this might be veering into "please explain to whitey about racism" territory but if there's an article or a book or something on this, please let me know because this is so baffling to me. Who would want to be oppressed when oppression is so awful?

So I'm from the south. Everyone and their dog here claims to have cherokee ancestry and there are a number of origins for the stories. I think there's a factor of white people playing Indian being more accepted than real natives. To many of them it's a novelty or fun fact, some of them take it farther and establish fake 'tribes', usually recognized at the state level but not federally because they have no actual history.

During the confederacy, it actually became sorta a weird show of white southern pride to claim to have cherokee ancestry, basically saying 'my family has been here in the south long enough that we were here before the cherokees were removed.' So it was a way to show 'deep roots' in the south.

There was the Guion Miller roll, where cherokees were given a payout of $133 each because of a lawsuit. A lot of people applied knowing full well they weren't cherokee, just hoping to get some money. We even see lawyers advertising the payout to get people to apply just to see if they could get some. 2/3rds of the applicants were declined for having no proof of Cherokee ancestry, and I figure some family stories may have started there. If it wasnt the applicant themself keeping up the lie, maybe it was someone later finding the application and thinking it must have been truth.

In some cases, the cherokee land lotteries could be the origin. Once cherokees were forced out of north Georgia, their land and everything on it, including their houses and personal belongings, was raffled off. Settler families made themselves at home and even started passing down the cherokees belongings as heirlooms. Eventually the story got twisted into the family being cherokee instead of stealing from them.

Then there are some other things. Mixed people claiming to be native because it was less stigmatized than being mixed, ancestors that could've lived in a place called cherokee or near the cherokee and that got misunderstood. The stupidest origin was an ancestor that lived in the 1700s who had a funny name, so she got recorded as being cherokee in the family Bible despite being from Virginia and having sounds in her name that aren't present in the cherokee language.

And I imagine there are plenty that were just tall tales someone told a kid for fun and it got passed down.

I'm not sure about the history of when these fakes started cropping up more, but I know it's been on the rise a lot in the last few decades.

And of course, nowadays, people love hiring people that give them diversity points without actually being diverse. And fake state tribes can make money. Here in the south, there isn't that much of a legitimate native presence. There is one real tribe in my state, none in two neighboring states. People here don't really figure real natives still exist outside those people with a cherokee gg grandmother that gave them high cheekbones. You'd be surprised how many people I hear saying 'oh yea but I doubt there are actually any fullblood cherokees left' and shit like that.

Oh, and also. Nowadays people love to avoid having to accept that their ancestors were colonizers. Hell, even my aunt who is also cherokee has said stuff like 'I'm sad that we have English ancestry, I was hoping we'd be Irish. I don't wanna be descended from colonizers' like.. auntie the Irish were colonizers here too. People love to be seen as less white. Youll hear pretendians saying 'no don't call me white, I'm not white I'm cherokee!' Etc. And ofc there are the hippie types.

Idk. I hope that helps somewhat, basically society is a lot more willing to accept a pretendian than a real native in a lot of cases. Plus I think a chunk of the modern issues faced by native communities is generational from past oppression [on top of the very real current oppression in native communities] and pretendians just cannot understand that.

And ofc the obligatory disclaimer that I'm reconnecting, I'm new to this too so im not an expert.

If you wanna see how many fakes there are [note: many many from Alabama and Kentucky], join the cherokee research and genealogy Facebook. Just for fun, I'm putting a post of theirs under the cut [it's long] that lists all the wild excuses and stories people have given for why their ancestors don't show up as native in research.

[akajustmerry]

Hey can u tell me wat race were the thg characters in the books? Was Katniss gale peeta finnick etc not white?

so this is kind of difficult to answer because in the world of the novels, The Dark Times™ whatever they really were clearly were so destructive to the fabric of society that the USA ceased to be what we know it as.

The process not only changed the land itself and how it was governed, but the language used to do that (states become districts, America becomes Panem, etc.). The fascistic government of the Capitol, when you read the books, clearly controls language as much as any other resource. Both Katniss and Snow (the only 2 pov characters in the novels) refer to words that have been forbidden and forgotten. Throughout the books you also come across words that are clearly mutated versions of known words "morphling" is one, which is the word used for what we call morphine.

I say all that to say that the people in the world of these novels, while they still obviously use English, they don't have the same concepts we do now because they've been eroded along with the language itself.

One of the crucial steps to control and oppress a population is deprive them of the ability to conceptualise and communicate that oppression. This is even happening right now wihh right wing governments around the world attempting to outlaw education and content on sexuality, indigenous histories, etc.

I say all this to say that the characters we read the POVs from in the thg novels do not and probably cannot define race in the way that we do now because doing so has been lost and repressed.

BUT!!!! that's not to say that racism does not exist, even though the language to define race is absent. Katniss is described as dark olive skinned, with dark eyes and dark hair. so is gale. I can't direct quote it, but Katniss talks in the early chapters of book 1 about how she is treated differently to her mum and sister who are fair and blonde. specifically, it says people do not warm to her as quickly like they do her sister and mum. Katniss also comments that the Capitol stylists make a mockery of her thick body hair. It's also worth noting she's among the poorest of district 12, living in the Seam. Not for nothing but Katniss also talks about how her father was also dark skinned and knew a lot about native plants.

These things on their own probably wouldn't necessarily point to Katniss being a person of colour, but together they paint a pretty clear picture of someone who experiences racism both systemically and personally even if she can't conceptualise it as that. Due to the fact Katniss' knowledge of plants and animals and carving weapons was passed down to her from her father, many people headcanon her as Indigenous, same for Gale.

As for Finnick? Jury's out. When I read catching fire well before the films came out I thought Finnick was maybe not white because he was described as very tanned and golden and in my experience white people just don't tan that way.

But Suzzanne Collins had very clear subtextual racial commentary in the books. Especially in the demographics of the districts. District 11 is predominantly Black (Katniss describes every D11 person as having typically Black features) and they're the agriculture district, described as the one that does the most physical labour. It's also the first district in the novel main story to do an uprising. And if you think a little bit about that and what Suzzanne Collins was saying with that particular subtext it's a very obvious racial commentary on the legacy of slavery and antiblackness.

Peeta was definitely white. Not only is he described that way physically. But his family is one of the wealthiest in D12 which means they had intergenerational wealth of some kind which it's clear Katniss and Gale did not.

Suzanne Collins is white and I think she did what the best white authors do when writing about race which is to acknowledge it and be realistic without overstepping or pretending to know. I'll forever hate the movies for eliminating that subtext.

[shakespearean-dream]

last of the big five yall!!!!

happy late fourth of july! remember to keep boycotting, speak out and listen to palestinians, the people of congo, native americans, queer/trans people and women currently being oppressed this independence day because america fucking sucks!!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

here are a couple good places to donate! please remember to do your own research and take care of each other, it’s getting scary out here.

ohhhh nimdok, where to start with you….

i have been dreading doing him because he pisses me off so bad but i actually had some decent fun with him :D. designing him and branching out farther away from his canon self was nice, but im not touching his backstory or personality really, that stays about the same for me in my head.

speaking of whichhh! like benny, i understand how the game makers had a short amount of time to fit an entire character arc of an old man undoing his deeply internalized racism/xenophobia/ableism in a singular short scenario, but unlike benny i actually somehow like his better?? nimdok had a lot more to get over (well not saying being a dickhead murderer isn’t a lot but 😭) and i enjoyed seeing him actually help out the people he would’ve previously turned in. it still feels a little hollow/unrealistic because again, he’s been like this his whole life, but considering how much AM takes him away from the group to (most likely) psychologically torture him for his actions he’s probably had a bit of a revelation.

doing his scenario was unfortunately funny at times because of the strange way we had to go about redeeming him with the golem guy😭giving him a smooch caught me off guard but ykw? i’ll take it for being able to kill mengele like immediately afterward. also speaking of whichhhh…

i would go into more detail about nimdok and mengeles relationship to give it some depth because god i love me some queers, but that is??? a real fucking guy???? a real life monster???? im less than comfortable picturing the fucker in my mind, much less giving him depth with a character who i also don’t like. like why ship ur essentially OC with a REAL LIFE N/AZI??? just another one of the reasons harlan elision creeps me out. (if that just pissed you off google search him s/a-ing 2 people, marrying a 19 year old when he was in his 40s and defending a child r/apist i really don’t feel like arguing with you. the guy was a horrible fucking person and he makes me sick, i just like this franchise.)

i cannot cough up anymore thoughts about this fella pls forgive me; these past couple days have been rough on my 3 brain cells. AM will for sure be next and after that fully rendered/decked out full bodies are in order!! so look out for that:]]]] i may also start posting some art fight things since i was just complaining about the lag a post or so ago☺️ jk ily artfight. team seafoam lets goo

ok i love u guys!!! if u have any requests for me drop a comment or an ask, and thank you so much for the continued support on my art❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️ lots of links on this post but one more quick reminder to take a look at my commission page if you’d like!!! yolanda is still in the shop because they cannot figure out what’s wrong with her :(

have a good night friends 🫶

[damnfandomproblems]

respond to a reply on this post: https://www.tumblr.com/damnfandomproblems/758279107941466112/fandom-problem-5461-cishet-being-used-to?source=share

"are you seriously equating making fun of a marginalized group to making fun of like, idk gender reveal parties or whatever people in your fandom make fun of cishets for doing? Like I don't mock people based on their sexuality but tell me that you do understand the difference between someone making fun of a marginalized group with a high suicide rate and someone poking fun at straight people.(Also, for the folks making racism comparisons: I'm white and when people make white people jokes about like, white people love avocado toast! White people love yoga and saying buddy! or whatever, 1) I don't mind 2) that's much different than a white person making fun of say, Black people.)"

As a poc, and specifically a queer (cisbi) native american (tlingit) who grew up around cishet white people, when it comes to online and fannish spaces I have noticed that people tend to cross the line from making harmless fun to just straight up expressing and encouraging hatred

While this is definitely a minority of people who believe and act out on these beliefs, there is a problem of people truly believing that cishet white people are all genuinely evil and inherently evil at that, and that the only way to "fix" (cleanse) the world of all problems would to be committed genocide in fandom spaces. They immediately assume the worse and dehumanize and rejected similarities they may share with cishet white people. It's absolutely prejudice and need to not only be called out, but utterly tossed in the bin

I get feeling uncomfortable or even wary of people who appart of the same kind of people who have oppressed you because you are not sure if they too have been indoctrinated into the bigotry, but we live in the modern era, more often then not you'll find that most cishet white people just don't care about poc and queer stuff

Cishet whites aren't responsible for crimes they weren't even alive for, that their ancestors committed. They are far more often ignorant because the education system is shit and has a lot racism/ableism/etc baked into foundation ontop of not really being how to do own research, then they are intentionally malicious and bigoted, and the best way to prevent them from being indoctrinated into bigotry is to just, expose them queers and poc who are chill with them and are willing to educate. Insulting them and assuming they want to hurt minorities just because they're cishet whites is the best way to push them into radical hands that will instead pain queers and poc as the ones who just want to hurt others for being cishet whites, because "obviously" why else would they immediately assume you want hurt them unless they want to hurt you?

Hating anyone for things they cannot control (race, gender, sexuality, etcetera) only breeds more hate. Yeah, don't tolerating bigots, but if genuinely can't stand a certain demographic of people ignore them rather then going out of your way to hate them. Educate if you can, or shut up when talking to people who haven't don't anything to you beyond offend your sensibly for committing the crime of being born a certain way, because otherwise you're just feeding into the genuinely malicious and bigoted peoples hands and making it easier for them to take the ignorant and make them malicious too

Hatred at the end of the day is hatred, sure, it might not be the racist or homophobic flavor of hatred, but it's still hatered. And no one should hate anyone, at least not for the things they can't control (because fuck pedos/rape-philies in general and murders and genuine racists of course, they can all go get shot, don't get me wrong and twist my words like I know some of y'all are just dying to do)

Posting as a response to a previous problem.

[spiderbitesandvampirevenom]

(this is a genuine question and I don't at all intend to be rude)

im a transmasc that's abt 5yrs on t, i.e. I'm TME by definition and am usually read by strangers as male in public

however. I have an androgynous fashion sense and while I dress masc a lot, a good percentage of the time i do enjoy wearing more fem clothes & makeup. on those occasions I am frequently assumed to be a trans woman and have been harassed and removed from businesses. (not that this has like. stopped me from dressing this way. but it does make me more wary when I do)

i know this isn't the same thing as Being a trans woman and experiencing transmisogyny on a systematic basis where it isn't just an aesthetic choice I make sometimes and is instead a part of a woman's gender and life, but it's always muddied the waters a bit for me in regards to the TME/TMA terminology

for the record, I prefer TME/TMA to AGAB given the relative uselessness of AGAB (and personally i find it rude & not always as helpful in medical settings as it is believed to be, having been on hormones long enough functionally changes how I react to a lot of things which is a whole other rant).

TME/TMA center trans women which I think is great as I think transmisogyny, even/especially within the queer community needs to be addressed, but I just wanted someone else's thoughts on my experiences

so im a little confused because you said you were going to ask a question and then didn't ask a question. but i assume the question was "am i affected by transmisogyny" to which my answer would be "Yes, but that doesn't make you TMA"

Yes, you do on occasion experience interpersonal discrimination, degradation, violence, or whatever else you'd want to call it, on account of being mistaken for a transfem person. BUT, and this is where we start to lose a lot of TME people when this is discussed, you are not a primary target of transmisogyny as a form of systemic oppression, which is what TMA denotes.

to analogize from something in my own life, I grew up in a place without a whole lot of native american people. There were, however, a lot of latine people living there. Whenever I faced interpersonal or systemic discrimination there, it was almost always misdirected anti-latine racism. Was I Affected by this discrimination? Yes. Does this make me latina? no. it makes the people around me bigoted idiots who don't know what they're talking about.

[theladygazingatemptiness]

like I've seen so many posts made by people of color (most of them not even religious!) that rightfully criticize and call out white atheism as a movement and the racism (against Natives and Muslims specifically) that's fucking rampant within it but because they had the audacity to imply that a white person being an atheist doesn't make them objectively incapable of racism and that white atheists do in fact have white privilege over religious Natives and Muslims everyone just calls the posts reactionary (ignoring the fact that a fuckton of white atheists are reactionaries and very anti-leftist themselves (TAA, anyone?)) and take the post as Some Religious Zealot Attacking Atheism rather than a nonwhite person criticizing a very real subset of racism disguised as legit criticism of religion.

these types of criticisms aren't about atheism vs religion, they're about whiteness and people using atheism to weaponize their whiteness against poc in the same way that white Christians use their Christianity to weaponize their whiteness against poc. it's about the fact that some forms of anti-theism can in fact be the result of racism sometimes. it's about the fact that you cannot say that you support Natives and then put the Native religions that were forcefully eradicated by colonialism on the same level as the White Western Christianity that replaced it. it's about the link between white atheist culture and the fundamentally racist Eurocentric standard of "intelligence". and if y'all feel this threatened by poc discussing these things and calling out your white atheist faves for their racism then y'all can go have a pleasant chat with and bond with racist right-wing Reddit bros about those barbaric Natives and violent Muslims while bragging about how Not-Reactionary you are I guess

idk where this recent trend of people implying if not outright stating that there are no valid criticisms of atheism as a community/culture/movement (esp white libertarian-brand atheism) and that everyone who's ever criticized somebody's atheism in any way no matter way is a reactionary by default but I can't say I'm fond of that tbh

[thetepes]

(Same anon) Yes, I meant Patch. Plz spill the tea

Patch wasn't forced to draw a damn thing. They've been drawing freak shit and rping freak shit of their own volition for years and half of it for others was given for free. There are callouts for their rp account and main account going back yeeears. I brushed against them in the rp community and had a friend be abused by them.

DentedSpork

Look them up.

Patchwork Heart was in with Poppy and Zena and Lily Orchard, there's a pattern here and it's freak rapist wannabe kid fuckers to the core.

I got people willing to talk about them for days. All the racism, sexual harassment, just plain fucking harassment, lying, and abuse this person has left a trail of is on another level.

OH and they were perfectly fine with P&Z abusing their fucking kid so long as they got their mommy time. Knew about the abuse too, it wasnt a secret. Said so on twitter. Check out some of the art that's up still on twitter that Shiloh drew of those two cuddling while Spawn was starving and being denied the bathroom.

I could keep going. They do the same thing as Lily, hide behind a native and trans identity so no one has the oppression points to call them out. I'm fucking shocked no one had the balls during the P&Z fallout to point out Patch lying like a motherfucker then scampering out like a rat when it all got dragged into the light and they couldnt lie anymore.

[girlactionfigure]

Winning the World’s Hearts and Minds

Israel is losing (some even say she has already irrevocably lost) the information war that is being waged in parallel with the kinetic one that she has been engaged in since 1948, but especially since 7 October 2023. The usual suggestions are technical: spend more money, react more quickly to enemy propaganda, utilize social media more effectively, and so on. All of these are worth doing, but there is one factor that is even more important than all of them together, and it is both simpler and more difficult. There are four paradoxes that can be found in our situation that expose it.

The Paradox of 7 October

On that day, Israel was attacked in the most atavistic, brutal and vicious way that can be imagined. Civilians were murdered, raped, sadistically tortured, and carried off to indefinite captivity under subhuman conditions. Their homes were looted and burned. It was war as practiced before the advent of civilization. It was the greatest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust.

And yet, although there were many expressions of sympathy, both from people in general and from governments and international organizations, there was also an explosion of hatred for Israel as a nation and for Jews as individuals. Demonstrations were held around the world expressing support for the attackers, and incidents of Jew-hatred – beatings of Jews, anti-Jewish graffiti, attacks on Jewish-owned businesses, and so on spiked. How is this to be understood?

One answer is that people were primed by a decades-long campaign by the Soviet Union, both in the West and the Third World, to use anti-Zionism as a propaganda tool. The Soviets took advantage of the sensitivity that had developed in the West after (ironically) the racist persecution of Jews by the Nazis, and of the general recognition of the evils of the Western colonial empires. At the same time in America, people began to comprehend the horrors of slavery, Jim Crow, and the genocide of Native Americans. The struggle of the Jews for self-determination in their historic homeland was perversely portrayed as racism, colonialism, and now even genocide. The Palestinian Arabs, who were in fact invaders and migrants, were portrayed as an oppressed and colonized indigenous people. This inversion of reality, this “big lie,” was fed with a constant tsunami of propaganda that overwhelmed anemic Israeli attempts to refute or counteract it. The lies have always gone halfway around the world before the truth got its pants on.

Since the fall of the USSR, the campaign has been taken up by the Arabs, Iranians, and international Left who see Israel as an outpost of the hated USA.

The anti-Israel campaign has been disingenuously claimed to be “only anti-Zionist” and not anti-Jewish. But underneath the surface the message has been transmitted clearly and distinctly, and has triggered the closeted anti-Jewish hatreds that have been around at least since the year zero. It is not possible today to go back and undo this.

The way anti-Israel and anti-Jewish propaganda has been deployed in support of the desired genocide of the Jewish people (nothing less) is a triumph of social engineering. Its effectiveness is shown by the combination of murder and defamation that characterized 7 October.

The Paradox of Holocaust Education

In planning a response to anti-Jewish propaganda it’s necessary to consider the attempts to attack the anti-Jewish memes – the prejudices, stereotypes, conspiracy theories, and so on – that were supposed to have caused the Holocaust. One response has been to educate people by presenting the historical facts. Any normal person who knew the true dimensions of the horror perpetrated by the Nazis would reject the patterns of thought that were behind it and shun anyone trying to promulgate them, it was reasoned.

Much money and resources have gone into the building of museums, the development of curricula and materials, and the hiring of experts. And yet this enterprise has failed. It has been met with denial. It has aroused resentment, as Jews are accused of trying to “monopolize oppression,” or of using their own experience as an excuse to persecute others (sometimes at the same time as the Jewish experience is denied). Perversely, the very horror of the Holocaust is titillating to Jew-haters who often admire Hitler, collect Nazi regalia, and so on. Extreme Jew-haters see the Holocaust as something to be repeated rather than condemned.

The Paradox of Sympathy

This gives us a clue to the more general problem of defamation of Israel and Jews. As Jonathan Haidt argues persuasively, humans are primarily motivated by their emotions, even when they believe that they are making decisions on a rational basis. The “reasoning” is really after-the-fact rationalization of choices driven by their feelings. These feelings are often below the surface of consciousness, but they are dominant in a person’s decision-making.

These emotional responses have developed in humans after millennia of biological and cultural evolution. They vary to some extent between cultures (which leads to interesting questions about conflicts between Western and non-Western cultures), but there are also aspects that are universal. One of these is sympathy for an injured person. Paradoxically, there is also an opposite emotion of revulsion. The impulse to despise, to expel, or to flee from a defective or persecuted individual tends to favor survival of an individual or a culture, and so it is strengthened by evolution. We see this tendency among children where a bully that attacks a weak or “different” child is often joined by others.

Thus when a group is mass-murdered, along with sympathy for the victims there is also a tendency to side with the murderers. There is a feeling of safety in the face of horror that comes from the knowledge that one is set apart from the victims, that one is on the other side.

The Paradox of Strength

Another evolutionary trait is an attraction to the stronger side in any conflict. Everybody loves a winner, or as Osama bin Laden said, the “strong horse.” It’s also true that people despise a loser. And before a contest is decided, people choose whom to support based on the perceived strength of each opponent.

Yet in Western cultures people think this feeling should be suppressed. There is a belief that rational considerations and morality should override brute strength in determining the outcome of a confrontation, which results in conflicting emotions (this is one of the reasons they do so poorly when negotiating with Middle Easterners, who see “rational” willingness to compromise as weakness). Strength and honor are of primary concern in the Middle East, but even toward the West, we gain allies by demonstrating strength.

How to Win the Information War

What are the practical lessons for Israel in all this? How can she use the consequences of human and societal evolution to help her overcome the massive propaganda assault, both in the West and in the Middle East? I will offer some suggestions for how she can behave for the best psychological effect. Note that I said “behave,” and not just talk. Actions speak louder than words, especially in the Middle East. And these actions will help bring success in the physical arena as well.

1. Win the War in Gaza

We were humiliated and wounded – from a psychological point of view, critically – on 7 October. We cannot allow Hamas to remain in power and its leaders to remain alive. If we do, we will be marked as victims, in other words, targets. In the Middle East, deterrence comes from honor. If we lose our honor, everything we have is open for the taking.

2. Win the War in the North

Tens of thousands of Israelis have been forced to vacate their homes in fear of bombardment and invasion by Hezbollah. In effect we have allowed our land to become occupied. Again this is a massive loss of honor and must be corrected.

3. Our Lives are More Important Than Theirs

Israel lives in fear of the US and the hostile “international community” of anti-Israel NGOs and institutions, and goes to extreme lengths to warn civilians before attacking military targets, and to allow humanitarian aid to be provided to enemy populations. These policies have made it possible for Egypt to refuse to accept refugees from Gaza, and for Hamas to prolong the conflict, arguably resulting in more civilian suffering than less. Either way, they signify weakness. Get it over with.

4. Return to an Offensive Strategy

Israeli strategy, as propounded by David Ben Gurion, was to take the war to the enemy, fight on his territory, and finish wars quickly. But since Israel has allowed the US to dominate its military policy, she has moved to adopting a defensive posture. Huge amounts of money are spent on weapons like Iron Dome to bat away enemy rockets. This is economically unsustainable, since offensive weapons are much cheaper. It invites the enemy to learn lessons and try again. And from a psychological standpoint, it normalizes shooting at Jews. How can we permit that to become acceptable?

5. Responses Should Always be Disproportionate

Israel’s response should always be several times stronger than our enemies’ provocations. The fact that we responded to an attack from Iran by hundreds of missiles and drones by bombing a radar station was embarrassing, even if it was a demonstration of our capabilities. We may wish to demonstrate capabilities, but we must also demonstrate the will to fight. Deterrence means making them afraid to attack us. Power means hitting back at bullies, not trying to push them away or running from them.

6. Treat the Conflict as Zero-Sum (it is)

Do not look for win-win situations; there aren’t any. Either the Land of Israel will be ruled and populated by Jews, or by Arabs. Americans love the idea that Hamas or the PLO can put aside their desire to destroy Israel if only given an opportunity to develop a prosperous state. Nothing could be more wrong. This is a tribal conflict over land, and tribalism is another evolutionary “built-in.” When Israel goes along with these fantasies, she broadcasts weakness.

7. Get Revenge When Appropriate

Implement the death penalty for terrorist murder. This has the practical benefit of removing a motive for hostage-taking. The modern position is that revenge is atavistic and wrong. But it satisfies a deep need as well as sending a necessary message.

Conclusion

Acting according to the post-WWII Western conception of moral national behavior exposes Israel to depredations by its enemies who do not care about Western morality. At the same time, the climate of opinion that has developed over decades is such that the mechanisms and institutions that might protect a Western state don’t apply to Israel. She has little to lose by changing her behavior to become more aggressive, and aspiring to respect and even fear. Overall this will improve her potential to gain allies and deter enemies.