#we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children

[princeofteevs]

[blackpearlblast]

hey, if my ask is insensitive or simply too much work/you dont want to give your opinion/energy thats ok, and im sorry for bothering you if it is. ive seen many jewish people say "from the river to the sea" is a dogwhistle/generally antisemitic phrase to use, but you used it in your golem art's text part(incredibly moving text btw.) im asking you bc you mentioned youre jewish and i thought you might have insight or thoughts to give on why you use it/what you think about the first statement about the phrase?

hi, yes, i would be glad to talk about my perspective on this! first of all, i do want to say that i think a lot of palestinian bloggers have already talked about this and their voices will always be what you want to seek out first when educating yourself. however, i do know the crowd of people claiming that "from the river to the sea" is antisemitic/genocidal has been very loud so i understand why you would want to hear a jewish perspective on it too. second, in order to explain why i think "from the river to the sea" is not antisemitic will involve me comparing it to actual antisemitic, nazi slogans and dogwhistles and talking about what they mean. so just a heads up for that before it comes up.

the full phrase is "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free!" i think a lot of times in accusations of antisemitism people leave off the second half of the phrase in order to claim it is calling for something else to happen from river to sea (like the expulsion or execution of all jews.) but that's just like, not, ever, a thing? that is said? you can tell the pieces of the phrase go together because they rhyme and also are said together by palestinians and allies near constantly. it's "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free." and i think all of the fearmongering relies on a good bit of ambiguity beyond that too. "what does a 'free palestine' mean? could it meant they want to throw all the jews into the sea?" - some zionist when i tried to look up the origin of the phrase in case there was anything really important i was missing that i should cover in this. there's like this idea that they can't really be asking for a free palestine, there has to be some kind of catch.

i think it's also important to look at the circumstances that this slogan was born under. the thing about modern day palestine and occupied palestine, on which israel tries to build itself, is that even though spatially the land stretches from river to sea, the people's experience of it does not. because of the apartheid system of checkpoints, ID-based restriction of movement, and blockades (in the case of gaza), there exist great gulfs in the land that are impossible or near impossible for people to cross. there can be a place a couple miles away, that due to lacking the "proper credentials", is more distant for palestinians living under apartheid than perhaps a destination a cross-country trip away would be for you. so i see the call for a free palestine specifically "from river to sea" to remove those gulfs and allow freedom of movement for everyone. i find very little of this has to do with jews, personally. the only connection is that the people who set up and maintain this system of apartheid happened to be jewish. and i hope that we would all agree that resisting one's oppressors- even if those oppressors are also marginalized and oppressed in other ways- is not a bad thing.

but it is true that many white supremacist/antisemitic slogans may focus more on the creation of a (white) nation than actually the jews themselves, since they have already established among themselves that a white nation has to mean no jews. so let's look at some of the more famous nazi rallying cries and how different they are from "from the river to the sea."

the fourteen words are most primarily known to be "we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." wow! i guess we could find some superficial similarities between this and river and the sea, like if we really wanted to stretch it. but personally, there's a ton of alarm bells in my head that this phrase sets off while river to the sea doesn't. the emphasis of "we" and "our" when used in this way really implies an us versus them narrative. and here the ambiguity really is present and malevolent! a "free palestine" is a palestine unrestricted by apartheid and colonialism. a "secure existence" and "future for white children" is uhhh, what does that Mean. like, we Know what that means right. but they aren't saying it. we can very easily find people saying what a free palestine means if we listen to palestinians. please, please listen to palestinians. there are so many people talking about what their idea of a decolonized palestine looks like, but the basics are generally one state, for all people, with equal rights for all, and the ability for those who were expelled from their homes in the nakba and all of the many long years following it, to return.

"blood and soil" is even vaguer. but thankfully(?), nazis were very enthusiastic about explaining what the phrase meant to them. "blood" is the superior aryan bloodlines and eugenic values that they wished to propagate and the "soil" represents the land of germany and the desire to "reject modernity and embrace tradition" by leaving urban life behind and living in the idealized countryside. (see we got a twofer here!) the only possible connection i could make to from the river to the sea here is the emphasis on the land but that on its own doesn't feel significant to me. land and the place where you live is very important to all kinds of humans all over the world. and i think another particular aspect of "blood and soil" is the emphasis of how you are living on the land. it's not just enough to be able to live in your homeland with freedom of movement and the ability not to be killed with impunity by occupying soldiers (lucky you!), you want to live there in a state of racial purity exemplified by eugenic values. in general, in nazi slogans, there is a particular fixation with a society shaped to represent these specific values. the call is not for freedom from repression, from an actual occupying colony, but instead from the considered bad actors and impure values coming from within their society. freedom from having degenerates sullying their perfect aryan nation. there is a plea to be able to get rid of those who do not match their view of a perfect society. the plea for a free palestine is, so much, a plea to be able to keep their family members, their friends, the friendly stranger down the block. that is not a fascist ideology, that is the will to live. and though i am referring to the ideology surrounding "blood and soil" in past tense because i am referencing the coining of the phase, these sentiments and slogans are obviously (and unfortunately) alive and well today. though, there is a particular irony to white american neo-nazis chanting it on stolen land.

"they will not replace us"/"jews will not replace us" refers to the "great replacement" theory, that jews are orchestrating a mass replacement of white people with immigrants (specifically non-white, often muslim immigrants.) i do not think this slogan has even any superficial similarities to from the river to the sea. you could definitely compare this sentiment to israel's attempts to maintain an artificial ethnic majority, since in many ways the potential "solution" to the "great replacement" would also need to involve creating/maintaining an artificial ethnic majority. (this is obviously not saying that israel subscribes to the great replacement theory, but that the tactic of maintaining artificial ethnic majorities is shared between zionism and great replacement theorists, since both ideologies rely on a specific ethnicity being the majority in their country.)

dogwhistles like 88, triple parenthesis, etc. rely on being vague symbols so that only those who know what the symbols stand for know what they mean. (88=HH=heil hitler, the triple parentheses representing the supposed (((echoes))) of jewish influence throughout history.) "from the river to the sea, palestine will be free" is a complete phrase that directly names its cause. people who say "free palestine" want you to know they stand with palestine. i guess if you wanted to be going for the most bad faith reading possible you could say "free palestine from what?", to which every palestinian and everyone who has been remotely paying attention to what palestinians are saying would shout: "from apartheid, colonialism, ethnic cleansing, and currently, very open and deliberate genocide!" like, it is true that if you felt you did not glean every aspect and detail of what the people in the occupied territories are calling for, you would be correct! but they are answering this. they want to talk about it. the reason i do not believe from the river to the sea is genocidal or antisemitic is because i have been reading and listening to what palestinians are saying and none of them have said they want to kill all jews. they do not want genocide, they want to go home! they just want to go home. i don't know most of this was written pretty tongue in cheek because i was talking about nazi slogans and nazis are pathetic and even more pathetic when held up against a movement of people who are legitimately trying to fight against a great wrong that was committed against them, but i just get so sad saying this. they just want to go home. haven't you ever felt that way before?

in the end, words mean things, and even more importantly, the contexts they're said in mean things. and while it's true that antisemites do hide behind dogwhistles and vague statements for plausible deniability, the alternative meaning does have to actually be established somewhere for them to be effective. from the river to the sea lacks an established alternative meaning. fearmongering from people who refuse to listen to what palestinians are actually saying does not make sense to me as legitimate definitions of the phrase.

also!!!! i'm sorry this got so Fucking long, thank you if you actually made it this far! i intentionally used "from the river to the sea" in my artists statement because it frustrates and upsets me so much to see people making such a big fuss about it when actual antisemitism goes unpunished. like a lot of the phrases i talk about here were chanted at the charlottesville neo-nazi march in 2017 and while many people were deeply upset and angry at what happened, the jewish community was not rallied around even Close to as much as it right now. and with joe biden saying "if it weren't for israel, not a single jew in the world would be safe" at a fucking hanukkah celebration i just. i don't know. the push back against "from the river to the sea" has so much to do with backing colonial and imperial interests and so so little to do with our actual safety. the concept of our identities and safety is being weaponized against palestinians, and at the same time makes it harder to identify actual antisemitism. and that hurts.

[znotyou]

Did any one else notice that "It is our God-given duty to maintain the standards of Finetime." Sounds a lot like the 14 words.

For those who don't know the 14 words are"We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children"; it's the most infamous white supremacist slogan. Like... This is scarily similar

[jewish-sideblog]

I think we are encountering the dawn of a kind of decolourized supremacy. By that, I mean that many white and otherwise privileged Westerners are keen to dismantle their own internalized White Supremacy in our modern era, and that is a good thing in theory. But while many of them do a decent job of deconstructing the externalized expressions of racism, ie the Whiteness, very few actually manage to address the underlying ideals of Supremacy.

Lee Edelman touches on this while critiquing reproductive futurism in No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive. He quotes the White Supremacist slogan: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children". Edelman argues that this slogan is not repulsive exclusively because of the word "white"-- if you take the racism out, it still represents a very harmful and repressive colonialist ideology. The idea that we survive through our children and that we must secure their future at any cost is harmful to feminist, queer, and other minority causes. When held by US Republicans, it is the ideal that led to the Dobbs repeal of Roe v Wade, and any number of oppressive anti-Queer legislation targeted at "protecting children".

Yet it is also a harmful ideology found in many Western liberals and leftists-- The idea that we can't have kink at Pride because a shirtless gay guy in a leather dog mask could somehow be harmful to a Queer child. The idea that we have to combat the climate crisis for the sake of future generations, as if the Third World is not already experiencing the effects of climate devastation firsthand today. The idea that we have to enact common sense gun reform in the USA to protect children from school shootings, not to protect adults and children alike in communities of colour who have been dying to gun violence since long before Sandy Hook or Columbine. None of the examples in this paragraph are explicitly homophobic, imperialist, or racist, but they can and do still carry those effects. The ideals of supremacy linger, even when the whiteness is cut out.

Jewish communities right now are seeing a deeply insidious form of this decolourized supremacy. The explicit racism is gone, but the underlying currents of antisemitic and colonialist supremacy are still going strong. Hence the shift from targeting Jews to targeting (((Zionists))), but not ever targeting evangelical Christian Zionists, who outnumber Jewish Zionists by the millions. Hence the disrespect and trivialization of the Jewish connection to our native lands, and the hatred towards the most successful land-back movement in history, while they still offer lip service and slactivism towards the native groups whose land they actively occupy. These are convenient ways for them to perpetuate supremacist ideals without an indefensible appearance of racism or coloniality.

It is a new and disguised racism, and the most terrifying thing is that it’s disguised internally against the very people who are being racist. They’re incapable of seeing their own bigotry or wrongdoings. Their own supremacy has convinced them that they are right, that they are righteous, that they are good and can do no wrong. We’ve seen this before— it’s the same kind of supremacy responsible for Manifest Destiny and the White Man's Burden. They act as though they know better about our own cultures and people than we do, and that they somehow know what’s best for us, even as they talk over us and disregard the pain they are causing.

This is rapidly becoming the default position of liberal and leftist activism. And, mark my words, it will destroy progressive movements in the Western world if left unchecked.

[wonderfulworldofmichaelford]

Kanye West then: Hm yes the Great Expectations soundtrack is the perfect sample for my song about RoboCop.

Kanye West now: We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.

[mithliya]

We must secure the existence of our people and a future for jewish children

did u really just. take a white supremacist phrase and change “white” to “jewish”? crazy behaviour

[matan4il]

Isreal must secure the existence of their people and a future for Jewish children

Hi Nonnie! Yes. Just... yes. Just like every other country. Every single country has a contract with its citizens that it will secure their existence. In the case of Israel, a country also established to be a refuge for Jews in need of it, this contract extends to Jewish people everywhere around the world. Even the anti-Zionist ones, and even the ones who don't believe they'd ever need or want Israel. We can never foresee tomorrow. There should always be at least one place on the face of the Earth that Jews can escape to if the world surprises us for the worse again, and that place has to be safe for them.

Thank you again, I hope you're doing good! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

- Wow. I did not know that this was a white supremacist slogan. Thank you to all the people who told me. This is where you can tell that I am not an American. That's what a whistle dog is, right? Unless you're familiar with it, you wouldn't recognize it.

But here's what this person doesn't get:

White supremacists believe that there is a war between the races, and one race can only secure its existence and future at the expense of the other ones. We, as Jews, know better than that. We have ALWAYS co-existed with others, whether when in the exile of the diaspora, or even before that, when our ancestors lived in the Land of Israel. There were always non-Jews living amongst us, and by our side. There was always the biblical rule that commanded us to be kind to non-Jews. Because we are ALL made in God's image. Securing the existence and future of Jews was never meant to be at the expense of anyone else. That's why the State of Israel accepted the two state solution since its inception. That's why so many Israeli Arabs live as citizens here. Israel was never meant to be a Jew only state, and it never will be. And that is a part of its strength. That is a part of how we will secure its existence and future, because we are ALL better off when we strengthen and enrich and uplift each other.

Miss me with this supremacist and racist bullshit.

[bullshit-tqia]

The original 14 words: “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.”

“Lesbian Israel” + a twist of the 14 words. But don’t mention that Benjanun comes from a family of billionaires and that she is indirectly responsible for the deaths of six…or you are believing a “nazi’s” word over hers. Despite the fact that none of us know who wrote the initial report and that Benjanun can easily lie about who that person is.

Don’t criticize Benjanun…or you’re a racist.

[princeofteevs]

What are the odds of you dreaming two "slogans" and later writing them down and later finding out that they each contain exactly:

14 Words each

61 letters each

74 characters each

20 syllables each

741 Simple English Value (A=1, B=2, C=3,...) each

?

Do it. Construct two slogans, deliberately. They need to contain between 10-20 words each with the same exact number of letters including punctuation & space (characters) with the same exact number of syllables each and the same exact Simple English (ABC, 123) value each.

It's not shooting fish in a barrel.

14 - 88 = -74

14 / 88 = 7/44

88^2 = 7744

7*4 = 28

And Nature's laws are G*D's laws and the highest law of Nature is the preservation of one's own kind. The 14 Words are "divine" and based on Nature's highest law.

[wandaluvstacos]

WHAT WE DIE FOR

Chapter 2 is up (and Free!)

Mikayel Simonian was a fledgling vampire once, though he doesn’t remember how he was turned. What he does remember is waking up in the year of 1988 to a group of magical misfits with the ability to cure vampirism—with exceptions, of course. Their history as fledglings themselves combined with the power of their magic enables them to do what no normal human can: hunt vampires. Over forty years, Mikayel has brought an end to more fledglings than he can count, and even a few full-fledged vampires. He’s seen most things. What he’s never seen before is a vampire deliberately seeking his coven out with a new fledgling in tow to beg them for a cure. Because a cure for the fledgling would mean turning her into a vampire hunter. But this handsome and unusually principled vampire named Eric Krüger seems insistent, so Mikayel and his team agree to try.

People have started dying on Mikayel’s home turf, and new fledglings are the cause. Whoever is controlling them is wily and secretive, and neither Mikayel nor his fellow hunters can track the fledglings down once they vanish into the night. It may require the help of a foe. Erich claims to know the vampire villain and has insight into what he has planned. But no one has ever teamed up with another vampire to hunt a vampire—Mikayel may be the only one crazy and desperate enough to try. 

Contains: mxm with some light fxm, blood (obvs lol), gore, murder, sex scenes, slow burn romance, some nazi shit (bigotry, homophobic/transphobic slurs, etc)

Genre: Horror/romance/thriller

Rating: 18+

EXCERPT:

           “I’m not doing any favors for a vampire,” Said replied.

            “You wouldn’t be doing it for me,” the vampire said. “You’d be doing it for her. She was getting ready to go to college. She was—she is a great kid. She didn’t deserve this. Please.”

            “How do you know her so well?” Mikayel asked. “She’s not your kid, is she?”

            “No. But I know her family.”

            “What about him?” Sadie pointed to the man still hyperventilating on the floor. “You know him?”

            “No, he’s just a neo-Nazi I kidnapped.” The vampire lifted a foot and pushed him over onto his back with the blank and uncaring expression Mikayel was used to seeing on vampiric faces. “He’s scum.”

            “How can you know that?”

            “You can check his body. He’s got the fourteen words tattooed on his back.”

            “The fourteen words?” Said asked, eyebrow lifted.

            “We must secure the existence of our people—” the vampire began.

“—and a future for white children,” Mikayel finished. When Sadie stared at him, he threw up his hands. “What? I used to fight skinheads back in my punk days, remember?”

            “Really?” the vampire asked with a flicker of interest.

            “Listen, I don’t care who this dude supposedly is, you’re not allowed to torture and kill someone anywhere within our territory—and preferably outside of it, though I cannot patrol the entirety of the world. You have to let him go.”

            The vampire frowned. “He’s a Nazi.”

            “Yes, I realize that. You alone don’t have the right to decide whether someone deserves to die. If you let him go, we’ll consider this fledgling of yours.”

            “You would be making the world a better place if you let me kill him.”

            “Absolutely not.”

[warningengine]

Nerd humour 2003: talk QWERTY to me! :D :3

Nerd humour 2023: We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children

[femme-objet]

when i was a kid i saw some sort of documentary fearmongering about how "in 200 years there might be no white people at all" and i thought they meant it as a good thing. we'll have stopped racism because we're all mixed now yayy!

i understand thats also a very naive way of seeing things but i just can't fathom going for the "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for [my race's] children" approach

[theteej]

Belonging and the Future: Thinking through Anti-queer Violence

T.J. Tallie, University of San Diego

I followed the discussion of the defacing of the NWU Potchefstroom campus pride flag with interest this week.  As a professor, I find incidents like this one an increasingly and depressingly common occurrence on university campuses of late.  But events here in Southern California, where I work, prompted me to think about this more broadly as part of a larger set of responses, particularly at white and settler institutions.

This week in California, two separate events echoed the Potch incident.  First was the murder of Laura Ann Carleton, the owner of a local boutique who was shot by an assailant displeased with the prominent Pride flag she displayed at her business.  Carleton’s killing was widely reported in international media, and people have begun to opine at large upon the significance of increasing conservative rhetoric demonizing LGBTQ+ people as ‘groomers’ or threats at large to the whole of American society.  The second event was less reported, but still noteworthy; over 150 protestors marched from the Los Angeles City Hall to the headquarters of the Los Angeles Unified School District, where the city’s Board of Education was holding a routine meeting.  The protestors explicitly demonstrated against LGBTQ+ education and programming in the LAUSD, which is the second largest public school district in the United States after New York City.  That a large protest in an ostensibly progressive city and state would occur explicitly as an anti-queer counterattack in education seems at first incongruous.  But the killing of Carleton and the protests themselves represent a larger trend in the United States in particular.  These incidents, along with the Potch pride flag defacement, offer insight into a particular kind of backlash that exists at the intersections of historically white settler societies and around the larger anxieties and contestations over who claims the present, and indeed, the future.

When interviewed, the LAUSD demonstrators framed their rationale specifically through a lens of futurity and protection.  “We believe that there is a radical indoctrination system that has seeped from academia and now into K through 12. We’ve been trying to get kiddie porno smut books out of the schools. And we don’t want people to talk about sex with our children without telling us and behind our backs,” San Diego-based protestor Ben Richards asserted.  While such a statement may initially appear to a bit of a confusing word salad, the argument coheres around an idea that the child is under threat, and with it, the future of the settler colonial state.  It is not a coincidence that the infamous 2017 Charlottesville protests, themselves on a historically white campus founded by slaveowner Thomas Jefferson, emphasized specifically about ‘not being replaced,’ and securing a future for ostensibly white people and their children.

It is not surprising if we see these overall phenomena as linked; the idea of protecting ‘a future’ by also displacing onto expressions of queerness the fears of an unstable white and colonial future. Protecting ‘children’ from the fear of a destabilizing queer future is a well-worn track of political rhetoric.  To unpack this idea, I turned to three theorists: Lee Edelman, Cathy Cohen, and Judith Butler.  For Cathy Cohen, white supremacy and heteronormativity function hand-in-hand as a way to justify the occupation of indigenous lands and spaces.  The normalization and justification a settler project is one that must first normalize the violences committed in the creation of the state, and then secondarily seek to defend it as inevitable by making sure that the next generation can inherit it without question.  In her work, this means that both people of color and queer people themselves can become threats to the perceived order of a white settler society, and can be subject to violence and persecution in order to keep the colonial society functioning as normal.[1]

Indeed, settler societies naturalize the violence of their existence by continuing to attempt to secure a future in colonial landscapes.  To do this requires investing in an imagined sense of future straightness.  As Edelman argued in his 2004 polemic No Future, queerness is often seen to those invested in the status quo of a colonial nation state as something fundamentally troubling and threatening to the orderly control of power from one generation to the next.  Thus, the occupation of indigenous lands and spaces becomes a project that must be upheld daily and secured for the next generation to come, the always in the distance ‘child’ who must be protected.[2]  For Butler, compulsory heterosexuality, then, is advanced by its proponents as the only real form of existence.  It must constantly reproduce what was created before it—and it is constantly on the brink of failure.  The stakes are high for such a project.  The world of straightness must be made and remade, constantly, it must be defended and protected, or the future is at risk.[3] 

This is why Laura Ann Carleton, even though she herself identified as straight, put the world and the future at risk for the shooter who saw her flag in front of her boutique.  By claiming space and a future for LGBTQ+ identified people, Carleton aligned herself with queerness, with a threat to the generations of security offered in by colonial society.  As Edelman argues, such a type of identification is unthinkable in the settler world of the colonial future, and instead is outside the only possible accepted world, that of “fighting for the children.”[4]

As I think through these moments of violence, of protest, and of rupture as a historian, I offer not a simple set of solutions or strategies, but a reminder that these are contestations in real time over who belongs, and over the very stakes of who can claim a future.  The Potchefstroom campus where the pride flag incident occurred, of course, is not exempt from its own settler histories.  Before its 2004 merger with other campuses to create North-West University, Potchefstroom was a historically white and Afrikaans religious institution, and could boast F.W. de Klerk and Pieter Mulder (of Freedom Front Plus) among its alumni.  The transformation of a campus that existed explicitly for the promotion of an Afrikaner Christian minority into part of the third largest university system in a democratic South Africa undoubtedly also creates a systematic series of anxieties about future, belonging, and place for a variety of stakeholders.  I am not arguing explicitly that the perpetrator must therefore be an aggrieved member who feels that they are losing power or place within society. I am, however, specifically arguing that the Potch incident also underlines larger questions about the future and who asserts claims of belonging.  Edelman, Cohen, and Butler all apply in thinking about the futurity and the histories of exclusion that animate a campus, even in its ostensible post-transformation moment.

Thus, the larger question I offer in light of these three incidents are not how could these things happen, but rather, how do Carleton, LAUSD, and Potch all cause us to think about the larger and more immediate stakes of belonging? These are more than just minor debates over flags and education, they are about who can and will exist in frameworks created by colonial violence. 

------

BIO: T.J. Tallie is an Associate Professor of African History at the University of San Diego.  They are the author of Queering Colonial Natal: Indigeneity and the Violence of Belonging in Southern Africa (Minnesota, 2019).

[1] Cathy J. Cohen, “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens: The Radical Potential of Queer Politics?,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 3, no. 4 (May 1997): 437–65.

[2] Lee Edelman, No Future: Queer Theory and the Death Drive (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2004).

[3] Judith Butler, “Imitation and Gender Subordination,” in Inside/Out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories, ed. Diana Fuss, illustrated edition (New York: Routledge, 1991), 312–13.

[4] Edelman, No Future, 2–3.

[can-i-make-image-descriptions]

[Image IDs: Image #1: Wikipedia text reading: Fourteen Words, or simply 14, is a reference to a slogan used by white nationalists and white supremacists: "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children." It can be used to refer to a different 14-word slogan: "Because the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the earth."

Image #2: Inside of a bathroom stall with XIV (roman numerals for 14) written twice in black permanent marker.

Image #3: Spray cleaner, a washcloth, and a expo marker.

Image #4: Close up of expo marker near the permanent marker on the stall

Image #5: Expo marker being used to cover up the permanent marker on the stall

Image #6: Washcloth wiping the segment of wall the expo marker was used on.

Image #7: The same segment of wall, with the section of permanent marker covered by expo marker in the previous images completely disappeared. /End IDs]

So, if you’re like me and work in a place with public bathrooms, you most likely have seen this shit before. Some racist fuck graffiti’d up your bathroom with nazi bullshit with a permanent marker.

Tired of this bullshit? Me too, so I’m gonna show you how to get rid of it nice and quick! 

The tools you need: A cleaner appropriate for the surface, the appropriate tool to to wipe said surfaces, and the crucial piece: A dry erase marker.

It’s embarrassingly easy to get rid of and is gonna make those nazi fucks upset that we don’t tolerate their bullshit. 

Just grab your marker…

…and draw over it

then you spray it with your cleaner and then… wipe

ta-fucking-da

now you too can use your new-found hack to get rid of sharpie graffiti

remember kids: fuck fascists, fuck nazis and racists, and fuck white supremacy 

[princeofteevs]

14-88, 14/88... those are math codes pertaining to 74 and the 666 Sun Square (14 Words are a divine commandment based on the highest law of Nature)

[kikotapasando]

OM eist 6 maanden gevangenisstraf voor projecteren discriminerende uitingen

OM eist 6 maanden gevangenisstraf voor projecteren discriminerende uitingen Nieuwsbericht | 17-12-2024 | 13:55 Tijdens de jaarwisseling van 2022 – 2023 werden op de Erasmusbrug teksten als “White Lives Matter”, “Vrolijk Blank 2023” en “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children” geprojecteerd. Tegen een 36-jarige man uit Landgraaf en een 26-jarige man uit…