#reinforce democracy

[influxovsnux]

Imagine thinking nobody in history accomplished anything before the advent of capitalism.

The above scenario never occurred, nor is it socialism, nor are specific economic systems required to inspire people to do good or important work.

The right-wing propaganda train has been doing this for a very long time. All in the name of transferring the world's wealth and power to a tiny group of unfamthomly rich people.

Sadly, it has been incredibly successful.

[rollercoasterwords]

ooh thats so cool! im doing my ba in international relations as well (im from hungary) and tbh i cant really say im too invested in it lol, altough i found my classes connected to history the most interesting so far. i have a class about post colonialism this semester and im kinda excited about that! <3

ooh yeah that’s exciting!! hope u enjoy the class <3 & yeah i ended up not liking my i.s. major but i don’t necessarily regret studying it too much…i know it’s def a field where lots of undergrads have pretty specific career aspirations which i did when i first started but then by the end of my degree i had completely changed my mind 💀 so it partially depends on after-graduation plans etc; i’m also only familiar w i.s. as an academic field in a u.s. university which. could understandably be more insufferable than elsewhere…but honestly if ur early on in ur degree & not finding urself super invested my advice is to be open to changing ur major if u don’t have a specific career etc that requires ur current major; if ur further along & need to stick w it then just try to supplement by taking course that are maybe cross-listed w other depts or electives in other depts if u can to make it more bearable lol

[silverfootsieamphibian]

Helldiver 2 alias Freedom Simulator

[ms-demeanor]

Trump 2016 was nothing compared to what's coming and you know it.

No I don't, and you don't either.

One of the problems that I have with electoralism is that every election is the most important election of our lives. Every election is the last one to save democracy. Every election is the only way that we can protect the marginalized otherwise so you have to vote blue no matter who or you're going to be killed in the streets by the red team.

This is propaganda to get people to vote, but what it also does is reinforce the idea that the only people who can save you are the ones on the ballot.

There are people all over the world living under fascist regimes, living in war zones, living in dictatorships, who are supporting one another. There are trans communities under Modi and queers in Russia and people who provide underground reproductive healthcare in Iran and people who provide medical care to their neighbors in tents in Gaza.

What you are doing is American exceptionalism in a liberal hat. This is NOT the end of the fucking world. This is NOT the worst disaster you will ever face. This is NOT a reason to give up or to stop caring or to stop working or to lay down and die.

Is this a good thing that has happened? No. But bad things happen all the time and we keep going.

If you must wallow, then wallow, but I've got shit to do just like I did last week.

[capitalism-is-a-psychopathy]

Billionaires destroy more than they create

In a land often championed for its economic opportunity and equality, the American Dream promises that anyone who works hard can rise to prosperity. But for many in today’s middle and lower economic classes, that dream is fading, shadowed by a reality that feels increasingly rigged. At the heart of this issue lies a stark and glaring imbalance: billionaires, a minuscule fraction of the population, wield a staggering concentration of wealth and influence. This is not just an issue of economics but one that touches the foundations of democracy and fairness.

Imagine the economy as a massive machine, built to churn wealth throughout society. In an ideal world, this wealth would cycle effectively, where each part contributes and benefits in turn. But as billionaires amass wealth at unprecedented levels, this machine has come to function more like a funnel, siphoning resources from the broader society and concentrating them at the very top. This dynamic, driven by complex financial structures and tax strategies, isn’t merely an accumulation of personal fortunes but a systematic extraction from the economic potential of others. The capital that could have flowed through wages, education, and public infrastructure is often diverted into private bank accounts and shell companies, rarely benefiting the people who drive and build the economy day by day.

As wealth accumulates at the top, so too does political influence. Billionaires, with vast financial resources, can fund political campaigns, lobbyists, and entire networks of think tanks dedicated to shaping policy. Through these channels, they push for tax policies, regulations, and trade agreements that benefit the ultra-wealthy at the expense of middle- and lower-income families. Politicians, indebted to these donors, increasingly look to billionaire interests rather than to constituents’ needs. This creates a disturbing feedback loop: billionaires influence politics to further policies that reinforce their own wealth and power, leaving the broader populace with dwindling opportunities to influence their own government.

This concentrated power extends far beyond campaign finance and lobbying. With ownership over significant segments of media networks, billionaires control the narratives that millions consume daily. Through these media outlets, they shape public opinion, diverting attention from policies that would challenge wealth accumulation and pushing narratives that frame the ultra-wealthy as essential “job creators” or “innovators” rather than acknowledging their role in widening economic divides. Issues that might threaten their economic stranglehold are often buried, while others, that create division and distract, are amplified.

For the middle and lower classes, this confluence of wealth, media, and political power has a real impact. Stagnant wages, diminishing job security, and rising costs of living aren’t natural outcomes of a complex economy—they’re symptoms of a system shaped to benefit those at the top. Policies that could lift working-class Americans, like raising the minimum wage, universal healthcare, or better labor protections, are often stifled in legislative deadlock, thanks in part to the political influence of the ultra-wealthy who stand to lose from them.

So, as this cycle continues, the gap between billionaires and everyone else widens. The billions accumulated at the top no longer signify mere success but a barrier to mobility for everyone else. The middle and lower classes find themselves carrying the economic burdens, often working harder for less. Meanwhile, billionaires remain insulated, living in a different economic reality, one far removed from the struggles of the average American. This isn’t just an economic imbalance but a distortion of democracy itself, as the machinery of power and influence is pulled further from the reach of ordinary citizens and held more tightly by those whose interests rarely align with theirs.

Without addressing this imbalance, the promise of opportunity, the cornerstone of the American Dream, becomes less attainable with each passing year, not just for the lower and middle classes but for the nation’s future as a whole.

Addressing their manipulation

Billionaires and their advocates often employ a familiar set of narratives to justify their wealth and the structures that enable it. These arguments, framed in terms of the free market, capitalism, or fear of socialism, are not only misleading but often serve to distract from the deeper systemic issues at play. Below is a breakdown of these claims and the counterarguments that expose their flaws:

1. “It’s Just the Free Market at Work”

The myth of the “free market” implies that billionaires achieve their wealth purely through talent, innovation, and competition in a market where everyone has equal opportunity. But in reality, the U.S. economy is far from a genuinely “free” market.

Counterpoints:

• Government Subsidies and Tax Breaks: Many billionaires’ businesses rely heavily on taxpayer-funded subsidies, special tax breaks, and other forms of government assistance. Large corporations frequently lobby for policies that grant them tax advantages, including offshore loopholes and capital gains tax breaks. This creates an environment where they aren’t competing on equal ground but rather with significant state support, distorting the market in their favor.

• Anti-Competitive Practices: Many large corporations, especially in tech and finance, engage in monopolistic behavior, buying out competitors or using aggressive tactics to drive them out of the market. This concentration of power stifles competition, contradicting the notion of a “free” market where anyone can succeed if they work hard.

• Inherited Wealth and Privilege: A significant portion of billionaire wealth is inherited rather than self-made. Generational wealth compounds, giving the ultra-wealthy an enormous head start over those without similar family resources. This challenges the idea that wealth accumulation is simply the product of individual merit or a fair market.

2. “This Is What Capitalism Is Supposed to Look Like”

The argument here suggests that capitalism is an inherently competitive system, where the most successful rise to the top, benefiting everyone through innovation and job creation. This narrative hinges on the idea of “trickle-down economics,” where the wealth of the richest eventually spreads throughout society.

Counterpoints:

• Trickle-Down Economics Doesn’t Work: Decades of evidence show that wealth rarely “trickles down” to the rest of society in any meaningful way. Income inequality has only widened, with wages stagnating for most workers while billionaire wealth has soared. Billionaires tend to reinvest wealth in ways that concentrate their holdings, like in stocks, rather than in ways that benefit the broader economy.

• Wealth Extraction, Not Wealth Creation: Many billionaires achieve and maintain their fortunes through rent-seeking behavior—extracting wealth from existing resources rather than creating new value. Hedge funds, private equity, and real estate empires often profit by cutting costs (like labor) rather than by innovating or producing new goods and services. This dynamic benefits investors but hurts workers and consumers.

• Capitalism Can Take Other Forms: The capitalism practiced in the U.S. today, sometimes called “neoliberal capitalism,” focuses on minimal regulation, tax cuts for the wealthy, and privatization. However, other countries demonstrate that capitalism can function with stronger social safety nets, wealth redistribution policies, and tighter regulations on corporate power. Nordic countries, for example, balance capitalism with robust welfare systems, ensuring a more equitable distribution of wealth and services.

3. “Without Billionaires, There Would Be No Innovation or Job Creation”

A popular myth is that billionaires are essential “job creators” and “innovators” whose wealth ultimately benefits society by funding new businesses and creating employment. This claim positions billionaires as indispensable to economic growth.

Counterpoints:

• Public Funding Fuels Innovation: Many of the biggest technological advances, including the internet, GPS, and medical breakthroughs, were developed with public funding rather than billionaire investments. Government research grants and subsidies often lay the groundwork for major innovations that billionaires later profit from. In other words, society bears much of the financial risk, while billionaires reap the rewards.

• Small Businesses Create Most Jobs: Small businesses, not billionaires or large corporations, are responsible for most job creation in the United States. Big corporations often eliminate jobs through automation, outsourcing, or consolidation. They may employ a large workforce, but they also tend to exploit workers through low wages, precarious employment, and cost-cutting measures.

• Billionaires Accumulate Wealth Through Wealth, Not Innovation: Many billionaires maintain their wealth not by creating jobs or innovating but by using their existing capital to generate more wealth, often through financial instruments that have little to do with actual economic productivity. Stock buybacks, dividends, and passive investments grow their fortunes without necessarily contributing to broader economic prosperity.

4. “Any Alternative Is Socialism or Communism”

When calls arise for higher taxes on the wealthy, stricter regulations, or broader social programs, the response is often to invoke the fear of “socialism” or “communism.” This argument seeks to paint any attempt at wealth redistribution or regulation as a slippery slope toward total government control.

Counterpoints:

• Social Safety Nets and Regulations Are Not Socialism: Social safety nets, progressive taxation, and regulations do not equate to socialism or communism; they’re features of a balanced capitalist system that seeks to prevent extreme inequality and protect public welfare. Countries like Germany, Canada, and Denmark combine regulated capitalism with strong social programs, resulting in healthier economies and greater well-being for citizens without abandoning capitalism.

• Inequality Threatens Capitalism: Growing inequality and economic instability can undermine the foundations of capitalism. A healthy capitalist economy requires a strong middle class with buying power, which excessive wealth concentration undermines. Reforms like progressive taxation, labor protections, and universal healthcare aren’t a rejection of capitalism but rather a means of stabilizing it.

• Historical Success of Mixed Economies: Many of the most successful and prosperous countries practice a mixed economy, where capitalism coexists with social policies that promote equality. The U.S. itself has employed a mixed economy model in the past, particularly after the New Deal, which implemented social safety nets, labor protections, and financial regulations that led to a period of unprecedented growth and prosperity for the middle class.

5. “They Earned It Fair and Square”

Finally, the idea persists that billionaires deserve their wealth because they “earned” it. This argument suggests that any policy aiming to redistribute wealth is fundamentally unfair, penalizing those who worked hard to succeed.

Counterpoints:

• Systemic Advantages and Wealth Hoarding: As previously mentioned, many billionaires begin with advantages—like family wealth or elite educational opportunities—that aren’t available to most people. Additionally, billionaires often employ complex strategies to avoid taxes, lobby for favorable regulations, and capitalize on government subsidies. These factors mean they haven’t earned wealth solely through hard work or merit.

• Billionaires Didn’t Build Alone: No billionaire operates in isolation; they rely on infrastructure, public education, and the work of thousands or millions of employees. A CEO’s wealth is made possible by a web of collective contributions, yet that wealth is rarely shared equitably. While billionaires might be rewarded for their role, their fortune is far from the result of individual effort alone.

In short, these narratives around billionaires often mask a more uncomfortable truth: today’s system is structured in ways that favor the ultra-wealthy at the expense of the broader population. Economic reform, rather than a threat to capitalism, is a necessary step to ensure a more just, equitable society where wealth accumulation doesn’t depend on privilege, influence, or systemic manipulation.

Making a change

Addressing the economic imbalance and the unchecked power of the ultra-wealthy presents a unique challenge, especially given the intense political polarization in the United States. For the middle and lower classes to push back effectively, they will need to build a coalition that transcends party lines and focuses on shared economic interests rather than divisive rhetoric.

1. Build Awareness Through Shared Issues, Not Ideology

The rhetoric around “free markets” and “socialism” often obscures real issues of economic struggle that affect both conservative and progressive working- and middle-class citizens alike. Instead of framing the issue in ideological terms, framing it in terms of tangible, shared grievances can help bridge the divide:

• Focus on Economic Inequality: Income stagnation, unaffordable healthcare, and housing insecurity are felt across the political spectrum. By shifting the narrative from “class warfare” to “economic fairness,” advocates can sidestep partisan language and emphasize the shared experience of economic struggle.

• Highlight the Impact of Corporate Power on Local Communities: Framing issues around how large corporations hurt small, local businesses can resonate strongly with both sides of the political spectrum. This approach often taps into conservative values around community and self-reliance, while also aligning with progressive critiques of corporate overreach.

2. Organize Around Labor Rights and Worker Protections

Historically, unions have been instrumental in improving working conditions and advocating for fair wages, and labor movements transcend political divisions. Many Americans—left, right, and center—share concerns about the erosion of workers’ rights, stagnant wages, and the declining influence of the average worker.

• Expand Union Participation and Labor Movements: Reinvigorating unions and expanding labor protections could give workers a stronger collective voice. New labor movements that focus on economic rights without overtly partisan language could attract support across the political spectrum, particularly when they champion issues like fair wages, workplace safety, and job security.

• Support Worker Cooperatives and Employee-Owned Businesses: Promoting models like worker cooperatives or employee-owned businesses can offer a compelling alternative to the current structure of corporate ownership without resorting to divisive rhetoric. These models prioritize local control and shared economic benefits, appealing to values of self-sufficiency and fairness.

3. Pressure Politicians on Key Economic Policies

A key to bridging the partisan gap is to focus on policies that benefit the broader populace rather than framing them as part of any ideological agenda. The majority of Americans, regardless of political affiliation, support policies like fair taxation, healthcare reform, and increased access to education when framed in terms of fairness and opportunity.

• Promote Tax Reform as “Fairness,” Not Redistribution: Instead of advocating for “redistribution,” proponents can push for tax policies that ensure everyone pays their fair share. Policies like a wealth tax or higher taxes on capital gains can be framed as holding the ultra-wealthy accountable rather than demonizing them, a stance that resonates with people who value fairness and personal responsibility.

• Advocate for Antitrust Legislation: Pushing for stronger antitrust laws to break up monopolies and prevent anti-competitive practices can appeal to both sides. For conservatives, this aligns with the values of market competition; for progressives, it aligns with corporate accountability and consumer protection.

4. Engage in Alternative Media and Independent Journalism

The ultra-wealthy often own or influence major media outlets, which can shape public opinion in ways that protect their interests. For the middle and lower classes to gain a clearer view of economic issues, alternative media sources and independent journalism that aren’t beholden to billionaire interests are crucial.

• Support Independent News Outlets: A growing number of independent news organizations are dedicated to in-depth economic reporting without catering to corporate interests. Supporting these outlets allows individuals to access a range of perspectives that help reveal the true impact of policies on ordinary people.

• Utilize Social Media Responsibly to Build Cross-Party Awareness: Social media, while often a divisive force, can also be used to spread information about economic injustice. When used responsibly to share facts, case studies, and stories of economic hardship, it can cut through the rhetoric and provide people across the political spectrum with a shared understanding of the issues.

5. Prioritize Voting Reform and Campaign Finance Reform

Money in politics is one of the core reasons why economic policies favor the wealthy. Bipartisan support for reducing corporate influence in politics is possible, especially when the focus is on fairness, transparency, and accountability in government.

• Promote Campaign Finance Reform as an Anti-Corruption Effort: Campaign finance reform, which seeks to limit the influence of wealthy donors and corporations on elections, can appeal to conservatives and liberals alike who are frustrated with the influence of money in politics. Instead of framing it as an anti-capitalist measure, framing it as an anti-corruption measure can attract broader support.

• Support Voting Reforms for a More Representative Democracy: Reforms like ranked-choice voting, ending gerrymandering, and preventing voter suppression can help create a political environment that more accurately represents the will of the people rather than special interests. By creating a more representative democracy, policies that reflect the economic needs of the middle and lower classes have a better chance of being enacted.

6. Create Cross-Partisan Grassroots Coalitions Focused on Economic Issues

Many grassroots organizations are focused on economic justice, but they tend to align themselves with one side of the political spectrum, often losing potential support in the process. Building cross-partisan coalitions that emphasize shared economic challenges rather than ideological differences could foster stronger, more united advocacy for middle- and working-class issues.

• Organize Around Issues, Not Parties: Groups like the Poor People’s Campaign, which focuses on poverty and economic justice, have successfully united people across political lines around issues that transcend party loyalty. This approach allows people to focus on their shared struggles, making the movement harder for politicians to ignore.

• Build Community-Level Alliances: Many economic issues are felt acutely at the local level. By focusing on community-level initiatives that address healthcare, affordable housing, and education, people can create practical, on-the-ground solutions that don’t require alignment with national politics. These local successes can serve as models for broader change.

7. Emphasize Civic Education on Economic Policies

Finally, bridging the gap will require education and awareness. Many people accept billionaire-fueled rhetoric because they lack exposure to alternative perspectives. Civic education efforts that focus on teaching economic principles, tax policy, and the influence of corporate power can empower people to understand the real impacts of current policies on their lives.

• Create Accessible Educational Resources: Podcasts, documentaries, workshops, and community discussions can all serve as tools for demystifying economic issues. When people have a clearer understanding of how things like tax policies and wage laws work, they are better equipped to make informed decisions.

• Promote Financial Literacy and Empower Individuals: Financial literacy programs that help individuals understand budgeting, credit, and investments empower people to navigate the economy more effectively. While this doesn’t directly address systemic issues, it gives individuals a greater understanding of the forces shaping their lives and can be a first step toward broader engagement.

By approaching these issues with a focus on shared struggles, fairness, and practical solutions, the middle and lower classes can work together to build a movement that transcends political divides. This movement can challenge the status quo without becoming mired in divisive ideological battles. The real strength of such an effort lies in its ability to unite ordinary people around a common vision for a fairer, more just economic system—one that serves all citizens, not just the wealthiest few.

[wilwheaton]

Clooney wrote of the "profound moment" the country is currently in, noting how just last month he hosted the "single largest fundraiser supporting any Democratic candidate ever, for President Biden's re-election." "I love Joe Biden," Clooney wrote. "As a senator. As a vice president and as president. I consider him a friend, and I believe in him. Believe in his character. Believe in his morals. In the last four years, he’s won many of the battles he’s faced." "But the one battle he cannot win is the fight against time," he continued. "None of us can. It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fund-raiser was not the Joe “big F—ing deal” Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate." Regarding the debate, in which the 81-year-old President stumbled continually, Clooney wrote that "our party leaders need to stop telling us that 51 million people didn’t see what we just saw." "We’re all so terrified by the prospect of a second Trump term that we’ve opted to ignore every warning sign. The George Stephanopoulos interview only reinforced what we saw the week before. As Democrats, we collectively hold our breath or turn down the volume whenever we see the president, who we respect, walk off Air Force One or walk back to a mic to answer an unscripted question," he wrote.

George Clooney calls on Biden to drop out to "save democracy" — just weeks after hosting fundraiser

George Clooney has nothing to gain and everything to lose, by telling the truth right now. Politicians and their supporters hold grudges for eternity. He’s speaking up and saying this now, knowing exactly what the stakes are for him, and for our country.

This is what I’ve been wanting to know. This is what the campaign has been hiding from us: WE all saw that President Biden had a bad night. The question the demands an answer is: was it a bad night? Or has time and age caught up with the president? Are we going to believe our lying eyes, or clap louder?

We don’t vote for just a president; we vote for an administration. For the most part, this administration has been fantastic, more progressive than I ever dreamed, to say nothing of rebuilding a nation out of the wreckage of four years of Trump.

And all of that is going to be burned to ash if President Biden can’t mount an effective campaign to defeat fascism and its leader. Since the debate, the campaign has kept him behind teleprompters and away from unscripted interactions. That’s alarming, and a tacit admission that he can’t fight like he once did, that the person we saw at the debate is the person he is most of the time.

If we lose this election, America will be plunged into decades of authoritarian, theocratic, christian nationalist fascism. The stakes will never be higher, and President Biden and his team need to do what is best for the country.

We will not win this election by clapping louder and gaslighting ourselves. We need — this crisis demands — a candidate who can clearly and easily refute Trump’s lies, and simply and clearly explain to voters what the stakes of this election are. The 2020 Joe Biden could do that; the 2024 Joe Biden doesn't seem to be capable of that, anymore, and that puts our entire nation and way of life at risk. George Clooney is telling us that he literally just saw, privately, what we all saw in public, and it was not a one-off. He also reveals that every single elected Democrat he talks to agrees with him, but they are too afraid to speak up. That’s horrifying, and I desperately hope it isn’t true.

But if George Clooney is telling us a hard truth, risking the wrath of countless powerful political players, and we should listen to him; not because he is rich and famous, but because he was literally in a room with President Biden and his supporters, and is now on the record that the President Biden we saw at the debate is not a guy with a cold or whatever, and now journalists can follow up with other people who were there to confirm or deny George Clooney’s observations.

These are tough questions that demand answers, now, because we are four months out and this shouldn’t be close, at all. America hates Trump, and he has lost every election since 2018 as a result.

President Biden and the Democrats need to run up huge margins in Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, and Ohio, to overcome the inevitable MAGA fuckery. We need a candidate who is fifteen points ahead of Trump, not someone who has been in the margin of error for his entire presidency -- which is fucking insane when you look at all of Trump’s felonies, judgments, impending trials, and all of his corrupt criminality that the SCOTUS MAGA Majority twisted itself into knots to protect.

This should be a landslide against Trump and MAGA. It’s close because the candidate running against him isn’t -- likely can’t -- be out there, every day, banging the podium and forcing a change in the narrative. 

Did you see my governor after the debate disaster? He was on fire. That guy would destroy Trump in a debate. Vice President Harris would be laser focused on prosecuting the case against him. President Biden is the only candidate who Trump could drag into a fucking dick waving contest about golf scores when the fucking future of American Democracy is at stake. There is not a single other credible candidate who would take that bait. My god.

President Biden has done so much more than I ever thought possible. He doesn’t get credit for all his progressive achievements, for pulling America out of a economic calamity (caused by Trump and his allies), forgiving student debt, his appointments to the FCC, FTC, and other regulatory agencies that had been captured by industry during the Trump regime.

All of that will be wiped out in a matter of days, if Trump seizes power again.

George Clooney is warning us that President Biden doesn’t have the stamina and focus to win reelection and secure not just his legacy but the future of our country. He is saying out loud and as publicly as possible that we are not crazy, that we really did see what we saw.

This is DEFCON 1 for Democracy. This isn’t politics as usual. This is a moment of tremendous existential danger that only gets worse with each passing day. IF President Biden remains the candidate, I will vote for him, obviously. But I hope that he will fire everyone involved in preparing him for the debate, because they failed him, they failed America, and if Biden is going to take the fight to Trump and MAGA the way he needs to, it he needs a team who understand who they are fighting against, how to punch Trump in the nose, and what the stakes are.

[psychotrenny]

The core premise of Democratic Socialism, that Capitalism can peacefully transition to Socialism through Liberal Democratic procedure, is an error that can only result from the most blatant revisionism. Because if you coherently apply Class-based analysis to the situation it's pretty obvious that the Bourgeoisie state would not passively allow its own procedures to decisively act against its class interests. Both in theory and in practice (i.e. the rise of Fascism in 20th century Europe) the Bourgeoisie are more than happy to drop even the pretenses of Liberal Democracy if they ever pose a serious threat to Bourgeoisie power. The State does not exist as an entity on its own disconnected from broader society; it is fundamentally an expression of and tool to reinforce the power of the dominant classes. It might be possible to, at least temporarily, turn those tools against them but the results that subversion can achieve are limited on a structural level.

Like Democratic Socialism only works if you adopt a fundamentally Liberal mindset, that sees social structures as determined entirely by metaphysical ideas. In this way, political positions are evaluated in terms of the abstract values they hold rather than the material interests they advance. "Democracy supporters would never oppose the results a free and fair election; that would go against their ideals". But as soon as you start looking through the lens of class analysis it becomes pretty clear that Liberal Democratic elections are just a means to an end, and an easily discarded means at that. Despite all the fuss they like to make about democracy, the fundamental fact is that the Bourgeoisie class were not voted into power and so cannot be voted out. Democracy under a DOTB is fundamentally a game where the Bourgeoisie set the rules and are free to ignore the results; you can't beat them at it no matter how good you play

[demeterdefence]

even ignoring everything else wrong with lore olympus (which in itself feels impossible) there is just something really egregious and insulting at the way a "modern retelling" over an ancient greek myth just full-heartedly whitewashes the entire culture and mythos.

and it's not like rachel is the first to do it - greek myths and legends have been whitewashed for centuries, depictions of the gods have been categorically stripped of their ethnicity and origins long before rachel got a hold of them. it's the fact that rachel goes out of her way to insult the original myths whenever she can, that she emphasizes and pushes a western-centric mindset and viewpoint over and over and over and not only reinforces the whitewashing, but continues it down the line.

like, this is the first episode.

rachel goes out of her way to mock the original styles and wardrobes of the ancient greek world, and i get her attempt was to make persephone feel "out of place" with the more "modern" clothing that the other gods wear, but it really just does more to a) demonize demeter, who is almost always in traditional clothing, b) sexualize persephone.

go even broader with it, move away from the clothing itself, and rachel doesn't even bother to use any of the ancient traditions that are core to the myths. like for the love of god, she uses a christian wedding for persephone and hades!

greece is the birthplace of modern democracy and had a powerful judicial system, and rachel instead uses the modern / western iteration of court because ... why not

(completely unrelated but the inserts of everyone except eros and aphrodite come from the stupid zoom session zeus had back when he first charged persephone with treason, meaning we have proof yet again that rachel isn't drawing the characters into the scene, she's making pngs and sticking them into pre-arranged backgrounds downloaded from stock images)

and there are ten thousand more examples i could pull, because this is just the whole entire comic. you can look at a lot of modern adaptions and see where things have been modernized respectfully, and where they are done with disdain for the source material - no one is claiming percy jackson, for example, is perfect, but the author took a great deal of care in his research, and the love for the original myths and culture shine through. lore olympus has zero respect for the original stories, exemplified in how rachel demonizes demeter - the actual crux of the myth. it's bad writing and bad research and further attempts to whitewash a rich and storied culture that had people from so many walks of life, who existed in full spectrum of lgbt identity, who did not conform or even know of the world that exists today. you can modernize without erasing it, and rachel's refusal to do so is one of the many issues tacked to lore olympus.

[probablyasocialecologist]

In his past media interviews, Sinwar has spoken of Hamas as a social movement with a military wing and framed its political goals as part of the historic struggle to reestablish a unified state of Palestine. “I am the Gaza leader of Hamas, of something much more complex than a militia—a national liberation movement. And my main duty is to act in the interest of my people: to defend it and its right to freedom and independence,” he said. “All of those who still view us as an armed group, and nothing more, you don't have any idea of what Hamas really looks like.... You focus on resistance, on the means rather than the goal—which is a state based on democracy, pluralism, cooperation. A state that protects rights and freedom, where differences are faced through words, not through guns. Hamas is much more than its military operations.”

Sinwar, unlike leaders of Al Qaeda or ISIS, has regularly invoked international law and UN resolutions, exhibiting a nuanced understanding of the history of negotiations with Israel mediated by the U.S. and other nations. “Let's be clear: having an armed resistance is our right, under international law. But we don't only have rockets. We have been using a variety of means of resistance,” he said in the 2018 interview. “We make the headlines only with blood. And not only here. No blood, no news. But the problem is not our resistance, it is their occupation. With no occupation, we wouldn't have rockets. We wouldn't have stones, Molotov cocktails, nothing. We would all have a normal life."

Throughout 2018 and 2019, Sinwar endorsed the large-scale nonviolent protests along the walls and fences of Gaza known as the Great March of Return. “We believe that if we have a way to potentially resolve the conflict without destruction, we’re O.K. with that,” Sinwar said at a rare news conference in 2018. “We would prefer to earn our rights by soft and peaceful means. But we understand that if we are not given those rights, we are entitled to earn them by resistance.”

Israel responded to the protests with the regular use of lethal force, killing 223 people and wounding more than 8,000 others. Israeli snipers later boasted about shooting dozens of protesters in the knee during the weekly Friday demonstrations. For many Palestinians these events reinforced the view that Israel’s policies cannot be changed by words.

Jeremy Scahill, On the Record with Hamas

[tomorrowusa]

America is getting weirdness fatigue. It's time to cancel The Trump Show and move on.

Some people who started middle school or high school around 2015 may actually think that Trumpism is normal in American politics. In fact, you'd have to go way back to the McCarthy era (late 1940s to mid 1950s) to find anything close to it.

Trump is to American Politics what COVID-19 is to public health.

Trump is not normal and we need to reinforce institutions of democracy to hinder people like him in the future.

The first thing we can all do is vote – and take more interest in what goes on at the state and local levels which are often neglected by liberals and moderates.

[zvaigzdelasas]

Haiti’s deepening crisis — armed groups launching an assault on the government, and the de facto prime minister on indefinite layover in the San Juan, Puerto Rico airport — is a predictable consequence of 14 years of U.S. support for undemocratic regimes connected to Haiti’s PHTK party as it has dismantled Haiti’s democracy.

Haiti has a chance at reversing this descent and returning to a more stable, democratic path, but only if the Biden administration will let it.

Prime Minister Ariel Henry was stranded in San Juan Tuesday on his way back from Kenya, where he had signed an agreement for Kenyan police to come bolster his repressive, corrupt and unpopular regime. The armed groups, including many that had collaborated with Henry’s regime, took advantage of his absence to attack government infrastructure, and free 5,000 prisoners, many of them members of armed groups. Henry had planned to fly to the neighboring Dominican Republic and take a helicopter ride back to Haiti’s National Palace under the cover of darkness. But Dominican authorities refused entry to the prime minister’s chartered plane, which re-routed to San Juan.

Prime Minister Henry has not yet resigned, and the State Department denied reports that it demanded his resignation. But Henry has clearly lost the support of the United States, which for two years had allowed him to resist Haitians demands for fair elections. Absent Washington’s support, Henry has little chance of regaining power.

This dire situation is not only predictable, it was predicted. Haitian-American officials, Haitian civil society, members of the U.S. Congress, and other experts had been warning for years that the U.S. propping up Henry would lead to increasing tragedy for Haitians. The United States, which installed Henry in power in the first place, ignored these pleas and stood resolutely by its friend. With U.S. support, Henry’s unconstitutional term as prime minister exceeded any other prime minister’s term under Haiti’s 1987 Constitution. Levels of gang violence, kidnapping, hunger, and misery also reached unprecedented levels.

The United States is still insisting on getting Kenyan troops to Haiti. The State Department has persistently — if so far unsuccessfully — tried to deploy non-American boots onto Haitian ground since Henry requested them in October 2022. The mission’s deployment initially stalled because it was widely rejected as a bad idea that will primarily serve to prop up the repressive regime that generated the crisis. Haitian civil society [groups] repeatedly insisted that the first step towards security must be a transitional government with the legitimacy to organize elections and determine how the international community can best help Haiti.

Concerns that the intervention would serve only to reinforce an unpopular regime led the countries that the Biden administration first tapped to lead the mission, including Canada, Haiti’s Caribbean neighbors, and Brazil, to pass. The U.N. itself concluded that the mission would require too much “robust use of force” to be appropriate for a peacekeeping mission. So, the Security Council took the unusual step of authorizing the mission, but on the condition that it not actually be a U.N. mission that the organization would have to take responsibility for. The Biden administration, likely concerned about election-year cell phone videos of troops shooting indiscriminately in crowded neighborhoods — as the last foreign intervention did — declined to send U.S. troops for the mission (but is considering deploying a small Marine contingent to Haiti in early March).

Last August Kenya — which did not even have diplomatic relations with Haiti but did need the hundreds of millions of dollars that the United States offered — agreed to lead the mission. The exploratory delegation Kenya sent to evaluate conditions in Haiti quickly realized how deadly the planned mission would be for Haitians and Kenyans alike, and proposed to limit its scope to protecting public infrastructure.

The United States was not open to renegotiating the deal, and Kenya withdrew its proposed limits. But Kenya’s High Court temporarily blocked the deployment as unconstitutional. Ariel Henry’s visit to Kenya was for the signature of an accord that Kenya’s President William Ruto hoped would overcome the court’s objections. Kenyan lawyers insist that the agreement itself is illegal, and are continuing their challenge. In the meantime, Kenyan officers who had volunteered for the mission are changing their minds. Another obstacle appeared on March 7, when the White House conceded that the mission cannot be deployed without congressional approval of funding.

The State Department’s insistence that the Kenyan deployment must nevertheless happen raises fears that the United States will also continue its policy of installing and propping up undemocratic regimes in Haiti. Finance Minister Patrick Boisvert, who Henry tapped as interim prime minister when he left for Kenya, increased concerns of authoritarian governance on March 6 when he declared a three-day curfew and state of emergency throughout the Port-au-Prince region in an edict that did not even mention the legal basis for his authority. The next day Boisvert raised more fears by extending the emergency measures for a month and adding in a ban on all protests.

The State Department’s rescinding its support for Henry might have been promising had the gangs not already made his ouster inevitable. State’s claim that it now supports “an empowered and inclusive governance structure” that will “pave the way for free and fair elections” might have been promising if it had not added the condition that the new government must “move with urgency to help the country prepare for a multinational security support mission.”

A legitimate, broadly supported, sovereign transitional Haitian government might request foreign police assistance. But a government allowed to form only if it accepts a U.S.-imposed occupation force originally designed to prop up a hated, repressive government is not sovereign. It may not be legitimate or broadly-supported either.

The United States tasked CARICOM, the federation of Haiti’s Caribbean neighbors, to forge a civil society consensus. CARICOM has enjoyed credibility in Haiti in the past, but over the past few months it has faced criticism for trying to strong-arm civil society into an agreement that maintained Henry’s power. Not surprisingly, CARICOM-led talks on March 6 and 7 failed.

When allowed, Haitians have a history of coming together to make their way out of a crisis. Haiti became a country in 1804 by defeating Napoleon, with almost no outside help. In 1986, when the U.S. finally withdrew its support from Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier, Haitians eventually wrested power from the military and held fair elections. In 2006, they voted their way out of the crisis created by the U.S. kidnapping of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide two years before. In August 2021, shortly after the killing of Haiti’s last president, Jovenel Moïse, a broad-based group presented the Montana Accord that would have created a transitional government leading to elections in two years. The U.S. vetoed the accord, citing, among other reasons, that the two-year time frame was too long. That was 30 months ago, and there are no elections in sight.No amount of submission to U.S. demands by Prime Minister Henry and his predecessors can justify the absolute horror that our support has allowed them to inflict on the Haitian people. It is time for the United States to let Haitians come together and make their way out of the current crisis. Civil society [groups] [see] an opportunity for democracy in the crisis, and people all over Haiti have been meeting, discussing and negotiating to develop platforms for a broad-based, legitimate transitional government that can hold fair elections. It is expected that soon — maybe within weeks — one of these platforms will rise to the top, and civil society will coalesce around it. The United States needs to let that process happen without interference or conditions.

8 Mar 24

[sulphuricgrin]

Thalmor and Fascism, a 'short' analysis

Hello! Welcome to my breakdown of the Thalmor party that gained power steadily after the Oblivion Crisis and soon created the Third Aldmeri Dominion. I follow Umberto Eco's Ur-Fascism (or Eternal Fascism: Fourteen Ways of Looking at a Blackshirt) and use his points as I delve further into how the Dominion might work in the 4th Era. I also use historical parallels and create world-building ideas for scenarios one could use. (ex: in fanfic, RP, etc.)

The parallels with real-world fascism make the Thalmor’s ideology both chillingly familiar and deeply immersive. >:3

By integrating these traits into world-building, I want the Dominion to become more than just an imperial power—it becomes a pervasive and insidious force shaping every aspect of life within its borders and beyond. These features not only make the Thalmor a more compelling enemy but I think also creates rich opportunities for storytelling.

I'm also planning a one-shot TES parody of sorts of Ur-Fascism, written by the father of one of my OCs. That's the reason why I started this to begin with. That, and my love for history, philosophy, and all things Elder Scrolls.

Fair warning, this is a long post! +3.6k words! So strap in, and please, I encourage talk/criticism, but keep it civil. Obviously this is only my interpretation and I tried my best at this. I would love to hear what others think.

I offer my short paper to Hermaeus Mora to store in Apocrypha ;)

1. The Cult of Tradition

The Thalmor’s reverence for ancient Elven supremacy mirrors real-world historical movements that glorified an idealized past to justify oppressive ideologies.

TES: The Thalmor frame the time before the rise of Men as a lost golden age of Elven dominance. They’ve always venerated the old, almost mythological Aldmeri civilization, despite very little history has survived. They could hold the Ayleid Empire (a high point of Elven civilization) as a model, ignoring its brutal practices like slavery and human sacrifice. They vilify human achievements, such as the Empire of Man under the Septim Dynasty, as an aberration in Tamrielic history.

Historical Parallel: The cult of tradition can be seen in Fascist Italy under Mussolini, where the regime idealized Ancient Rome. Fascists claimed to restore the grandeur of the Roman Empire to evoke pride and justify militaristic expansion. Similarly, the Nazis glorified an Aryan past, constructing myths of ancient Germanic peoples as paragons of civilization to reinforce their racial ideology.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor’s obsession with restoring ancient Elven dominance could involve deliberate distortion of history, erasing inconvenient truths about the Ayleids and glorifying their achievements to unite the Dominion under a shared identity.

2. Rejection of Modernism

The Thalmor’s disdain for change and multiculturalism reflects their rejection of modernity in favor of an exclusionary, stagnant worldview.

TES: The Altmer have a history of xenophobia. The Thalmor oppose the integration of races and cultures within the Empire, viewing it as a dilution of "pure" Elven tradition. They also resist technological and cultural advancements driven by non-Elves, such as innovations from the Empire’s blending of cultures. Their policies enforce strict adherence to Elven superiority, preventing any progressive mingling of traditions. 

Historical Parallel: This echoes the Nazi and Fascist rejection of modernist art, multiculturalism, and democracy. The Nazis, for example, condemned modern art movements like Expressionism and Cubism as “degenerate art” while promoting a “pure” Aryan aesthetic. Similarly, fascists saw liberal democracy as corrupt and promoted authoritarian control as a return to a purer societal order.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could actively suppress creative or intellectual progress, possibly banning works by humans or elves that deviate from their idealized Elven cultural norms. Their strict cultural laws could possibly lead to an underground resistance of artists, scholars, and mages seeking to preserve diverse traditions.

3. The Cult of Action for Action’s Sake

The Thalmor’s focus on aggressive policies and grandiose actions often prioritizes symbolism over practicality.

TES: The Thalmor's enforcement of the White-Gold Concordat—especially the persecution of Talos worship—is a clear example. The ban on Talos worship is more symbolic than practical, aimed at asserting dominance over human cultures rather than resolving tangible problems. Similarly, their brutal measures to crush dissent, such as burning shrines and executing priests, serve to showcase their power rather than address any real threat posed by Talos worshippers. Their actions seem more about demonstrating power and control than about achieving specific, practical goals.

Historical Parallel: This parallels Fascist Italy’s grandiose projects, such as Mussolini's attempts to “modernize” Italy with large-scale public works that were often inefficient or impractical but served as propaganda. Similarly, Nazi Germany emphasized militarization and dramatic displays of power (like the Nuremberg rallies) even when these actions were economically or militarily unsustainable.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could undertake elaborate but ultimately impractical projects, such as reconstructing ancient Elven temples or waging unnecessary wars to expand their influence, draining resources while reinforcing their narrative of Elven superiority.

4. Disagreement is Treason

The Thalmor’s intolerance for dissent ensures their ideological purity but creates a climate of fear and oppression. They suppress dissent with brutal efficiency, labeling any resistance to their rule as heretical or treasonous. 

TES: The Thalmor persecute anyone who challenges their rule or ideology. This is seen most clearly in Skyrim, where even whispering a prayer to Talos can lead to imprisonment or death. Their Justiciars patrol Tamriel, rooting out dissidents and executing them as traitors, regardless of the validity of the accusations. This mirrors a broader policy of suppressing free thought to maintain their narrative of unquestionable Elven superiority. There’s also the Night of Green Fire, were they attacked Altmer dissident refugees who had fled persecution in Alinor.

Historical Parallel: This is reminiscent of the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century, such as Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. In Nazi Germany, opposition parties and individuals were quickly silenced, with dissenters labeled as traitors or “enemies of the state” and sent to concentration camps. Stalin’s Soviet Union similarly purged perceived enemies, creating a culture where questioning authority could result in imprisonment or execution.

Implication for World-Building: Within the Dominion, paranoia would dominate daily life, with Thalmor spies embedded in communities and neighbors reporting on one another. This pervasive fear could lead to widespread distrust among Elven citizens, undermining the very unity the Thalmor claim to promote.

Criminalization of Debate: Debating Altmeri policies could be considered treason. Citizens speaking against the Thalmor might be arrested or "re-educated." 

Idea: Characters might rescue political prisoners or distribute forbidden pamphlets challenging Thalmor doctrine, or they could be forced into “re-education”.

5. Fear of Difference

Fascist regimes thrive on creating "others" to vilify and unite the populace through a shared enemy, using xenophobia and racial supremacy as key tools.

TES: As mentioned in #2, the Altmer have a history of closed borders and xenophobia. The Thalmor's ideology is rooted in the superiority of Elves over Men and other races. They actively foster division by portraying humans—especially Nords and Imperials—as inferior beings who disrupted Tamriel's natural order. This fear of difference extends to cultural and religious practices, as seen in their persecution of Talos worshippers and their disdain for mixed societies like the Empire. (The problem with Talos worship also stems from just the idea of a human achieving divinity, which is what every Altmer strives towards through their practice of the Path.)

Historical Parallel: Nazi Germany used antisemitism and anti-Slavic sentiment as core components of its ideology, portraying Jews and other minorities as existential threats to the purity of the Aryan race. Similarly, Imperial Japan framed non-Japanese Asians as inferior and justified brutal colonial domination under the guise of superiority.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could implement policies that segregate or exclude non-Elves from certain professions or cities within the Dominion. Their propaganda might frame intermingling of races or cultural traditions as a dire threat to Elven purity, driving a wedge between the Dominion's Bosmer, Khajiit, and Altmer populations. (We don’t see any Bosmer or Khajiit Thalmor/Dominion soldiers within Skyrim by 4E 201, but that’s very likely just to villainize one race.)

Segregated Settlements: Towns in Dominion-controlled regions could be segregated by race, with Altmer areas enjoying more lavish infrastructure while Khajiit or Bosmer neighborhoods languish. 

Idea: Characters might assist oppressed communities in improving their living conditions or organizing resistance.

6. Appeal to a Frustrated Middle Class

Fascist movements often gain traction among those who feel displaced or diminished in status, using resentment and promises of restored glory to rally support.

TES: The rise of the Third Aldmeri Dominion likely appealed to Altmer who resented their perceived loss of status under the Empire, particularly after the Oblivion Crisis and the Empire's weakening influence. By promising to restore Elven dominance and undo the damage caused by human rule, the Thalmor capitalized on the frustrations of disenfranchised Altmer elites and middle classes.

Historical Parallel: Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany drew significant support from the middle classes, who felt economically and socially marginalized after World War I and the Great Depression. The Nazis promised to restore Germany’s national pride and economic stability, appealing to those disillusioned by the failures of liberal democracy and internationalism.

Implication for World-Building: In the Dominion, the Thalmor’s rise might be tied to social unrest among Altmer artisans, merchants, and scholars (the most important roles within Altmer society) who felt overshadowed by Imperial influence. Those Altmer could display open disdain for humans or non-Altmer races, citing the Thalmor’s rhetoric as justification. Those promises of prosperity could mask policies that disproportionately benefit the Altmer elite while exploiting the Bosmer and Khajiit.

Economic and Social Tensions: The middle classes in Summerset Isles might be portrayed as benefiting from the Dominion’s policies, creating resentment among Bosmer and Khajiit laborers who are exploited for the Dominion’s expansion.

Idea: Characters might witness these attitudes in “quests” dealing with class or racial tensions.

7. Obsession with a Plot

Fascist regimes fuel paranoia by inventing or exaggerating conspiracies, framing all opposition as part of a grand, malevolent scheme.

TES: The Thalmor's rhetoric portrays Men as orchestrating the downfall of Elven civilization. Their ban on Talos worship is part of a broader narrative that blames human cultural and religious practices for undermining Elven power. They likely propagate myths of human conspiracies to keep the Dominion united against a common enemy.

Historical Parallel: The Nazis famously promoted the stab-in-the-back myth, claiming that Jews and communists betrayed Germany during World War I. Stalinist Russia similarly fueled paranoia with fabricated conspiracies, such as accusing political rivals of plotting against the state during the Great Purge.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could use propaganda to spread exaggerated stories about Imperial plots, such as secret Talos cults planning to overthrow the Dominion. This paranoia would justify oppressive policies and galvanize Elven citizens to report suspected traitors, deepening societal divisions.

Conspiracy Theories: Thalmor propaganda could exaggerate Imperial plots, creating paranoia. 

Idea: NPCs might warn characters about spies everywhere, leading to “quests” involving false accusations, actual Imperial agents working to undermine the Dominion, or the real spies being from the Thamor.

8. The Enemy is Both Strong and Weak

Fascism often paints enemies as simultaneously omnipotent (to justify fear) and weak or degenerate (to inspire contempt), creating a contradictory but effective narrative.

TES: The Thalmor frame Men as both a dire existential threat and as an inferior, corrupt race destined for subjugation. For example, the Empire is portrayed as a decaying shadow of its former self, yet it is also seen as a powerful adversary whose influence must be eliminated to restore Elven supremacy. This contradiction serves to keep the populace vigilant while reaffirming their racial superiority.

Historical Parallel: Nazi propaganda depicted Jews as both a weak, parasitic race and as cunning masterminds behind global conspiracies. Similarly, Cold War propaganda in the U.S. framed communism as both an inefficient system and an existential threat capable of destroying the free world.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could disseminate propaganda that mocks the declining state of the Empire while simultaneously warning of its "hidden strength" through Imperial-backed Talos cults or covert military alliances. This narrative would keep the Dominion in a state of perpetual war-readiness, fostering paranoia and militarization.

Contradictory Narratives: The Thalmor could mock the Empire as weak and corrupt while simultaneously portraying it as a looming existential threat. 

Idea: Characters might investigate inconsistencies in Thalmor messaging and uncover deliberate manipulation.

9. Pacifism is Trafficking with the Enemy

Fascist regimes view peace or compromise as betrayal, advocating for perpetual conflict to maintain unity and reinforce their strength.

TES: The Thalmor’s stance toward the Empire and Talos worshippers exemplifies this mindset. Despite the signing of the White-Gold Concordat, the Thalmor show no interest in genuine peace. They exploit the treaty to destabilize the Empire and justify continued hostilities. Their relentless pursuit of Talos worshippers, even in regions nominally under Imperial control, signals their refusal to tolerate coexistence.

Historical Parallel: This trait is reminiscent of Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, which glorified war as a tool for national renewal and strength. Hitler dismissed diplomacy as weakness, emphasizing militarization and expansion as ends in themselves. Mussolini similarly viewed war as a mechanism to revitalize the Italian people and demonstrate national greatness.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor could have internal propaganda glorifying war as a sacred duty of all Altmer. They might train their youth in military academies that indoctrinate them with a belief in perpetual conflict as necessary to reclaim and preserve Elven supremacy.

Perpetual War Machine: In Dominion regions, resources could be heavily taxed to fuel war efforts. 

Idea: Characters might aid farmers, merchants, or workers struggling under the burden, while the Thalmor justify this as a necessary sacrifice for Elven supremacy.

10. Contempt for the Weak

Fascist ideologies promote the idea that strength is inherently virtuous and weakness is despicable, justifying oppression of those deemed inferior.

TES: The Thalmor’s belief in Elven superiority leads them to view other races, especially humans, as weak and undeserving of respect or autonomy. Their treatment of the Bosmer and Khajiit within the Dominion could possibly reveal a hierarchy even among their allies, where Altmer dominate, and others are relegated to subservient roles. The Thalmor’s disdain for the “weakness” of the Empire is evident in their rhetoric and actions, portraying its willingness to negotiate as proof of its inferiority.

Historical Parallel: This mirrors the Nazi ideology of Lebensraum (living space), which framed Eastern Europeans as subhuman and justified their subjugation and extermination to make way for German expansion. Fascist Italy similarly dehumanized colonized peoples in Africa, justifying brutal exploitation under the guise of spreading civilization.

Implication for World-Building: Within the Dominion, the Thalmor might implement policies that systematically disenfranchise Bosmer and Khajiit while celebrating the physical, magical, and intellectual prowess of the Altmer. The Thalmor’s propaganda could depict other races as servile or parasitic, encouraging Altmer citizens to feel pride in dominating these “weaker” peoples.

Propaganda Celebrating Strength: Altmer architecture, literature, and art could be designed to evoke themes of Elven might and dominance, depicting other races as subservient or parasitic (point 10). For instance, public statues might show Elves towering over Men or crushing symbols of Imperial power.

Oppression of the “Weak”: Non-Altmer races could be forced into hard labor or conscription.

Idea: Characters/NPCs could share stories of family members sent to fight in far-off conflicts, providing characters with morally complex choices about intervening.

11. Everybody is Educated to Become a Hero

Fascist regimes emphasize the importance of sacrifice for the nation, glorifying those who devote their lives to the cause and framing ordinary citizens as warriors for the state.

TES: The Thalmor cultivate a culture where every Altmer is expected to serve the Dominion’s cause, whether through military service, loyalty to the state, or ideological compliance. The Justiciars are portrayed as paragons of Elven virtue, exemplifying the ultimate commitment to the Dominion’s ideals. Citizens are likely educated to believe that their sacrifices, no matter how small, contribute to the restoration of Elven greatness.

Historical Parallel: Nazi Germany placed significant emphasis on the concept of the "Volksgemeinschaft" (people's community), where every German was expected to contribute to the nation’s goals. Similarly, Fascist Italy glorified the ideal of the selfless soldier and the hardworking citizen as heroes of the state. In both cases, youth programs like the Hitler Youth and Balilla were used to indoctrinate the next generation into these values.

Implication for World-Building: The Dominion could have institutions that indoctrinate young Altmer into Thalmor ideology, teaching them to see themselves as part of a sacred mission to reclaim Tamriel for Elvenkind. Public ceremonies might honor fallen Thalmor agents as martyrs, reinforcing the idea that dying for the Dominion is the ultimate act of heroism.

Hero Cults: The Dominion might establish festivals or holidays commemorating key Thalmor victories and honoring fallen agents. Schools could teach children patriotic songs or hymns about their duty to restore Elven supremacy, with heroic figures like early Thalmor leaders mythologized. (Maybe? This seems too far.)

Idea: Characters could infiltrate these events to gather information or sway public opinion by exposing the truth about these “heroes.”

More World-Building Ideas

Points 9-11 underscore the Thalmor’s militarism, supremacist worldview, and ability to co-opt individual lives into their grand vision for Elven dominance. These elements not only enhance the narrative tension between the Thalmor and their opponents, but could also create opportunities for characters to encounter internal resistance movements, oppressed groups, and Altmer citizens questioning the cost of their rulers’ ambitions. I believe after the Great War, tensions would be even higher. 

12. Machismo

Fascist regimes glorify a hyper-masculine, militaristic culture that celebrates dominance, aggression, and disdain for non-conformity or “soft” values.

TES: The Thalmor embody this through their emphasis on martial prowess and superiority. While not tied to gender in the traditional sense, their ideology promotes a cultural machismo centered on Elven dominance, physical and intellectual superiority, and disdain for perceived "weakness." They scorn the cultural diversity of the Empire and other races as decadent or effeminate. Their authoritarianism also seeks to suppress dissent, intellectual inquiry, or emotional expression that doesn’t align with their rigid ideals.

Historical Parallel: Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany glorified masculine ideals of physical strength and aggression while marginalizing traits like compassion or introspection. Mussolini often emphasized virility and militaristic values, while the Nazis celebrated the archetype of the strong, disciplined Aryan soldier. Non-conforming individuals, particularly LGBTQ+ people, were persecuted as threats to this hyper-masculine ideal.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor might promote a rigid cultural code that prizes dominance, obedience, and aggression, possibly extending to martial tournaments or ceremonies that celebrate Altmer “purity.” Artistic expressions or philosophies emphasizing introspection or diversity could be banned or dismissed as “decadent.” They would continue with the tradition of marrying proper matches to keep their family blood “pure.” 

Propaganda Festivals: The Thalmor could organize grand public events where martial displays (military parades?) glorify Elven strength. These events would reinforce the idea that the Dominion thrives through dominance and order.

Suppression of Non-Conformity: Non-militaristic or “soft” cultural traditions—like Bosmer storytelling or Khajiiti spirituality—might be ridiculed or suppressed, leading to underground movements that preserve these traditions.

13. Selective Populism

Fascist regimes use rhetoric that claims to speak for “the people,” but this “people” is defined narrowly, excluding minorities and dissenters.

TES: The Thalmor’s concept of “the people” explicitly excludes humans and often sidelines their Bosmer and Khajiit allies. They frame themselves as the sole representatives of Elvenkind, claiming to act in the best interests of a unified racial identity. However, their vision of unity ignores or suppresses internal dissent among Altmer who reject their ideology, as well as non-Altmer who are relegated to subordinate roles. Their claim to represent all Elves is thus selective and exclusionary.

Historical Parallel: Nazi Germany used the idea of a Volksgemeinschaft (people’s community) to create a narrow vision of unity, excluding Jews, Romani people, and political dissidents. Similarly, fascist regimes often co-opted populist rhetoric to claim they acted in the name of “the true people” while disenfranchising anyone who didn’t fit their criteria.

Implication for World-Building: Within the Dominion, the Thalmor’s rhetoric might emphasize solidarity among Elves, but their policies reveal stark inequalities between Altmer, Bosmer, and Khajiit. Resistance movements could emerge within these oppressed groups, challenging the Thalmor’s selective definition of unity and exposing their hypocrisy.

Elven Hierarchy: Bosmeri and Khajiiti groups could face higher taxes, forced military conscription, or exclusion from political power.

Resistance Movements: Selective populism could foster alliances between oppressed groups—such as humans, Bosmer, and Khajiit—who band together to challenge Thalmor dominance.

14. Newspeak

Fascist regimes manipulate language to limit free thought and ensure ideological conformity. They simplify language and control its meanings to make dissent or complex ideas impossible to articulate.

TES: The Thalmor could enforce linguistic purity within the Dominion, outlawing words, phrases, or writings that contradict their ideology. For example, they might ban texts that celebrate Talos, Imperial culture, or non-Elven achievements. The Thalmor’s propaganda would use simplified, emotionally charged language to emphasize Elven superiority and demonize humans. Over time, this manipulation of language could erode the population’s ability to think critically or question authority. 

Historical Parallel: George Orwell’s concept of Newspeak in 1984 was inspired by real-world totalitarian regimes, such as Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia, where propaganda and censorship shaped public discourse. The Nazis used simplistic, repetitive slogans like “Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer” to embed ideology in everyday life. Stalinist Russia altered history books and redefined terms to serve the Party’s goals.

Implication for World-Building: The Thalmor might use the Divine Prosecution, making them responsible for censoring Imperial and Talos-related literature while promoting carefully curated texts that reinforce Thalmor ideology. Dissidents could smuggle forbidden books or create underground presses to preserve cultural diversity and historical accuracy.

Censorship Laws: The Thalmor could outlaw specific languages, such as Cyrodiilic, in Dominion territories. Altmer children might be taught revised histories that erase human contributions to Tamriel’s culture and development.

Idea: “Forbidden Literature” - Characters might encounter hidden libraries or secret meetings of scholars seeking to preserve banned texts. These locations could serve as hubs for resistance or offer “quests” to recover lost knowledge.

More World-Building Ideas:

Cultural Propaganda: The Thalmor could sponsor plays, books, and artworks that glorify ancient Elven achievements while mocking or demonizing human cultures. This would reinforce both their fear of difference (point 5) and their obsession with a plot (point 7).

Perpetual Fear Campaigns: Justiciar crackdowns on "Imperial spies" or "hidden Talos worshippers" could escalate over time, creating a culture of fear where anyone might be accused of treason. This aligns with points 7 and 8, as the threat is exaggerated to justify authoritarian control.

Resistance Movements: Bosmer and Khajiit characters might form secret organizations to challenge Altmer dominance. Characters could align with these groups or face pressure to spy on them, adding moral and faction-based dilemmas.

Thalmor-Run Education: Schools in Dominion territories might indoctrinate children into Thalmor ideology, with NPCs lamenting the loss of older traditions. Characters could disrupt this system by recovering banned texts or creating underground schools.

Religious Persecution: Talos worshippers might practice in secret, creating opportunities for characters to assist them or decide whether to betray their location to the Thalmor.

Civil Unrest: Cities in Dominion territories might feature visible tensions, with oppressed groups protesting or clashing with Justiciars. Characters could influence these outcomes by siding with either the protesters or the authorities.

[alainamama17]

The Shadows of History: Parallels and Warnings in American Democracy

As a historian, I am acutely aware that while history does not repeat itself, it often presents echoes that serve as warnings for the future. The United States today stands at a crossroads, with certain elements reminiscent of 1930s Nazi Germany and the ambitious plans of Project 2025, raising concerns about the direction in which the country is heading.

The 1930s in Germany were marked by the rise of authoritarianism, a period where democratic institutions were systematically dismantled in favor of a totalitarian regime. The parallels drawn between that era and the current political climate in the United States are not to suggest an identical repetition of events, but rather to highlight concerning trends that, if left unchecked, could undermine the very foundations of American democracy.

**Project 2025 and the Unitary Executive Theory**

Project 2025, a conservative initiative developed by the Heritage Foundation, aims to reshape the U.S. federal government to support the agenda of the Republican Party, should they win the 2024 presidential election. Critics have characterized it as an authoritarian plan that could transform the United States into an autocracy. The project envisions widespread changes across the government, particularly in economic and social policies, and the role of federal agencies.

This initiative bears a resemblance to the early strategies employed by the Nazi Party, which sought to consolidate power and align all aspects of government with their ideology. The unitary executive theory, which asserts absolute presidential control over the executive branch, is a central tenet of Project 2025. This theory echoes the power consolidation that occurred under Hitler's regime, where legal authority was centralized to bypass democratic processes.

**The Erosion of Democratic Norms**

In both historical and contemporary contexts, the erosion of democratic norms is a precursor to the loss of liberty. The United States has witnessed a polarization of politics, where partisan interests often override the common good. The Supreme Court, once a non-partisan arbiter of the Constitution, has been accused of partisanship, with decisions increasingly influenced by political ideologies rather than constitutional law. This shift mirrors the way the judiciary in Nazi Germany became a tool for enforcing the will of the regime, rather than a protector of the constitution.

**The Role of Propaganda and Media**

Propaganda played a crucial role in Nazi Germany, shaping public opinion and suppressing dissent. Today, the media landscape in the United States is deeply divided, with outlets often serving as echo chambers that reinforce ideological beliefs. This division hampers the ability of citizens to engage in informed discourse and make decisions based on factual information, a cornerstone of a functioning democracy.

**Civil Liberties and Minority Rights**

The targeting of minority groups was a hallmark of Nazi policy, justified by a narrative of nationalism and racial purity. In the United States, there has been a rise in xenophobia and policies that discriminate against certain groups. The protection of civil liberties and minority rights is essential to prevent the kind of societal divisions that can lead to the marginalization of entire communities.

**Conclusion**

The parallels between the United States today, Project 2025, and 1930s Nazi Germany serve as a stark reminder of the fragility of democracy. It is imperative that as Americans, we remain vigilant against the forces that seek to undermine democratic institutions and principles. The lessons of history implore us to safeguard the values of liberty, equality, and justice, lest we allow the shadows of the past to shape our future.

As a historian and educator, I believe it is our responsibility to draw upon these parallels not to incite fear, but to inspire action. We must engage in civic education, promote critical thinking, and encourage participation in the democratic process. Only through collective effort can we ensure that the American experiment continues to be a beacon of hope and freedom for the world.

[jewish-sideblog]

Re: Israel being proof that Western leftists don’t actually want decolonization: “But Israel doesn’t let gay people or interfaith couples get married!”

yeah because Israel recognizes that marriage is a fundamentally religious and institutional concept to begin with. For most of Israel’s history, it didn’t have civil or legal marriage at all. For anyone. Only religious marriage, which is handled by religious authorities. That system is far from perfect and far from equal! It has its own huge host of problems! But if we’re going to pretend like we want decolonization? Then we gotta actually let non-Western governments do non-Western things. Even if they’re messy and bad at first.

The (especially USAmerican) Western concept is that good marriage laws allow for gay people and interfaith couples to marry, because that’s the result of a righteous Western fight for equality under Western laws. But it leaves very little room for the idea that the institution of legal marriage is fundamentally flawed. Maybe gay marriage is a bad thing. Not because gay people don’t deserve the same rights as straight people. But because it reinforces the belief that the governments and societies should only afford certain legal and financial benefits to monogamous couples who undergo a religious ceremony in front of mandated officiants.

If you expect non-Western nations to do democracy and equality exactly like liberal capitalist Western nations do, then you don’t actually want decolonization. You want to enforce your ways of thinking and being universally, because you believe they are most morally righteous ways to be. That’s the colonial mindset, babe.

[robertreich]

Is Donald Trump a Fascist? 

I want to talk to you about the F word. No no — not that F word.

I’m talking about fascism.

Is Donald Trump really a “fascist,” as some would claim?

Is “authoritarian” adequate?

The term “fascism” is often used loosely, but you can generally identify fascists by their hate of the "other," vengeful nationalism, and repression of dissent.

To fight these ideas, we need to be aware of what they are and how they fit together.

Let's examine the five elements that define fascism and what makes it distinct from, and more dangerous than, authoritarianism.

1. The rejection of democracy in favor of a strongman

Authoritarians believe strong leaders are needed to maintain stability. So they empower  strongmen, dictators, or absolute monarchs to maintain social order through the use of force.

But fascists view strong leaders as the means of discovering what society needs. They regard the leader as the embodiment of society, the voice of the people.

2. Stoking rage against cultural elites

Authoritarian movements cannot succeed without at least some buy-in from establishment elites.

While fascist movements often seek to co-opt the establishment, they largely depend on fueling resentment and anger against presumed cultural elites for supposedly displacing regular people. Fascists rile up their followers to seek revenge on the elites.

They create mass political parties and demand participation. They encourage violence.

3. Nationalism based on “superior” race and historic bloodlines.

Authoritarians see nationalism as a means of asserting the power of the state.

For fascists the state embodies what is considered a “superior” group — based on race, religion, and historic bloodlines. To fascists, the state is a means of asserting that superiority.

Fascists worry about disloyalty and replacement by groups that don’t share the same race or bloodlines. Fascists encourage their followers to scapegoat, expel, and sometimes even kill such “others.”

Fascists believe schools and universities must teach values that glorify the dominant race, religion, and bloodline. Schools should not teach inconvenient truths about the failures of the dominant race.

4. Extolling brute strength and heroic warriors.

The goal of authoritarianism is to gain and maintain state power at any cost. For authoritarians, “strength” comes in the form of large standing armies that can enforce their rule. They seek power to wield power.

Fascists seek state power to achieve their ostensible goal: achieving their vision of society.

Fascism accomplishes this goal by rewarding those who win economically and physically, and denigrating or exterminating those who lose. Fascism depends on organized bullying — a form of social Darwinism.

For the fascist, war and violence are means of strengthening society by culling the weak and glorifying heroic warriors.

5. Disdain of women and LGBTQ+ people

Authoritarianism imposes hierarchies. It’s about order.

Fascism’s idea of order is organized around a particular hierarchy of male dominance. The fascist “heroic warrior” is male. Women are relegated to subservient roles.

In fascism, anything that challenges the traditional heroic male roles of protector, provider, and controller of the family is considered a threat to the social order.

Fascism seeks to eliminate homosexuals, nonbinary, transgender, and queer people because they’re thought to challenge or weaken the heroic male warrior.

These five elements of fascism fit together and reinforce each other.

Rejection of democracy in favor of a strongman depends on galvanizing popular rage.

Popular rage draws on a nationalism based on a supposed superior race or ethnicity.

That superior race or ethnicity is justified by a social Darwinist idea of strength and violence, as exemplified by heroic warriors.

Strength, violence, and the heroic warrior are centered on male power.

These five elements find exact expression in Donald Trump. His uniquely American version of fascism is rooted largely in White Christian Nationalism. It is the direction that most of the Republican Party is now heading in.

It’s not enough to call Trump and those promoting his ideas authoritarians when what they are really advocating is something far worse: fascism.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

The New Yorker just issued its cover: Donald J Trump, A Man of Conviction, by John Cuneo

+

Justice.

May 31, 2024

ROBERT B. HUBBELL

Justice.

On Thursday, May 30, justice was served in a Manhattan courtroom.

A jury of twelve citizens convicted Donald Trump on thirty-four felony counts of falsifying documents to interfere in the 2016 election.

Justice was served.

Trump received a fair trial before an impartial jury presided over by an even-handed judge.

Trump had the right to testify or remain silent. He chose to remain silent—as permitted by the Fifth Amendment.

He had the unlimited right to challenge jurors “for cause” if he demonstrated that a juror could not render an impartial verdict. Trump challenged only one juror for cause—a juror who had once been the houseguest of one of Trump's attorneys. That juror was later excused on a peremptory challenge by Trump.

Trump had ten “peremptory challenges” that allowed him to excuse jurors without providing a reason. Trump exercised all ten peremptory challenges.

Trump was able to object to the testimony of witnesses and the introduction of exhibits. He objected continuously. Many of his objections were sustained, and most were overruled (because they were baseless).

He cross-examined every witness offered by the prosecution. He offered two witnesses in his defense. They sealed his fate.

He made an opening statement and a closing argument to the jury.

He was able to submit and object to jury instructions.

After the jury began deliberations, its requests to review key evidence and important jury instructions indicated that it took its charge seriously.

The length of the jury’s deliberations and the unanimity of its verdict on thirty-four counts demonstrate that they were persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump was guilty as charged.

Justice was served.

The verdict matters because it demonstrates to Americans that the core of our democracy is strong and true.

One fair verdict will offset a dozen compromised and corrupt judges and justices. The verdict demonstrates what justice looks like—and reminds us of what we can have again if we gain control of Congress and retain the presidency.

The verdict is important because it reminds Americans that no person is above the law in our democracy. That bedrock truth must be reinforced periodically, or it will lose its animating force.

The verdict also speaks to the world. It reminds friends and foes alike that the audacious American experiment is robust and secure. Convicting a former president in a fair trial is something few other nations would attempt—much less accomplish in a peaceful and orderly manner.

The verdict gives Americans much to be thankful for:

A fair jury composed of twelve Americans willing to perform the simple but extraordinary task of sitting in judgment over a former president.

A District Attorney willing to carefully review the evidence and follow the law.

Competent and diligent prosecutors willing to do the hard work necessary to achieve justice.

An honorable, fair, firm judge willing to protect the rights of the defendant and the interests of the people in seeing justice served.

Court officers, law enforcement officers, clerks, paralegals, and court reporters who ensured that the court proceeding unfolded in an orderly and safe manner.

Given the fundamental fairness of the trial and verdict, Republicans are reduced to attacking the justice system itself. In a coordinated effort, Republican members of Congress issued statements that called the trial “rigged,” insulted the integrity of the jury, compared the proceeding to “show trials in Cuba under Castro,” and said that May 30 was “the most shameful day in American history.”

While we should be concerned about the assaults on the justice system, let’s recognize that the system prevailed today—despite seven years of attacks by Trump and his enablers. The trial and verdict served as a stress test for the justice system—and it passed.

There will be time to assess the political ramifications of the verdict. Today, we should celebrate that the justice system worked despite enormous efforts to obstruct and undermine it.

That is a remarkable, glorious achievement that stands alone.

Sit with that truth for a moment before returning to the urgent task of preventing Trump's reelection. We deserve a moment of calm reflection and sober relief that justice was served.

Justice.

Finally.

[Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter]