#you don't get to choose who lives and who dies; or who's allowed to vote

[that-disabled-princess]

Thinking about how Nazis and rapists and pedophiles and abusers and racists and fascists are all people

[wowbright]

At what point are we allowed to stop calling oppressors victims? At what point are we allowed to start holding them up to the same standards we hold ourselves?

I'm all for putting myself in other people's shoes. I understand that people are products of their circumstances. I understand that people are told lies and given misinformation, starting in in the home and public schools.

There may be people who truly do not have access to another point of view. But I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the majority have access, but just don't care to look. My highly educated father-in-law-in-law is a lawyer. He knows how to do research. But he watches OAN and FOX and says hateful things about immigrants even though he has "friends" who are immigrants because that's what he chooses to do. Because that is a little world of fear and hatred that he has decided to corner himself into. And no, you can't blame his religion for that (United Church of Christ, for crying out loud), or his social network.

There is something he gets out of being scared of the world and wanting to control other people. He is not a victim. I don't have to feel sorry for him because he voted to put a self-proclaimed dictator into office.

I don't need to feel sorry for the salt of the earth white guy at the bar who, after a long conversation where he acknowledged a litany of Trump's faults and Kamala Harris's superiority on questions of policy, settled on a defense of, "Well, I just don't like how Kamala Harris looks so I'm going to vote for Trump."

I don't have to feel sorry for the woman about my age who didn't bother looking into either candidate's policies because, "There are to many immigrants in [neighboring city] so I'm voting for Trump because he's gonna get rid of them."

I was born less than three decades after the Axis Powers willfully and gleefully massacred millions in the name of patriotism and "saving the economy." I learned to speak the same year that the dictator of the country where I was living, the person we thought was the last European holdover from those years, died. I started school in a country that had been occupied by Nazi Germany and where no one, absolutely no one, talked about how we just needed to understand that the average German who voted for Hitler back in the day was just a victim of ignorance, and also we really needed to sympathize even with the ones that weren't victims of ignorance and voted for him because of his economic policies, because obviously they were voting out of concern for their children's futures and not because they wanted to destroy people's lives.

My childhood was filled with nightmares of the Fascistis and SS coming to our house and taking us away.

I do not have to feel sorry for the people who are willing to stand by and let other people suffer. I do not have to see the people who shrug at declarations of dictatorship as deserving of my sympathy. I do not have to view people who dehumanize other people and pave the way for their destruction as victims.

They are not victims. They are perpetrators. And I will call them what they are.

[myths-tournaments]

Awful Characters Round 3 (1/8)

Propaganda under the cut!

GREGORY HOUSE

He’s the medical malpractice doctor from the medical malpractice show. Man has never had a healthy relationship in his life and isn’t about to start now and by god he will break any law. Loyal but super weird about it, and makes everyone around him worse but also more interesting. He’s insufferable and I love him.

The show is regularly called the medical malpractice show. Everything he does is either questionable, illegal, dangerous, or all of the above. He’s said countless racist/sexist/homophobic things at any given opportunity, even to his friends. He has exactly one friend who is a thrice-divorced loser oncologist who only really stays with House because he's afraid of who would get hurt if he didn't. House will do anything to solve a puzzle or — God forbid — prove a point. He regularly puts people in danger to prove points of figure things out. His only morally redeeming quality is that he’s turned this obsession onto medical cases, and so usually the patients live. The show acknowledges multiple times that the only reason anyone tolerates his constant abuse is that he's a good doctor.

IANTHE TRIDENTARIUS

Her number one hobby is ruining every person's that she knows life. Her second hobby is being soooo slutty about it despite looking like a literal wet rat. Her third hobby is having an extremely unhealthy relationship with her twin. Her other hobbies include cannibalism, wearing a maid outfit, being extremely convinced she is the main character, the badboy sexy love interest and the villain. 'Why', you may ask. Well, the answer is, for shits and giggles #justgirlythings i, aswell as literally everybody else in the fandom have gone through the pipeline from hating her to desperately wanting to fuck her. expect for i still fucking hope she dies and doesn't come back for good. (that would literally solve all of everybody's problems) as god intended (EXPECT FOR. one of her hobbies literally is gaslighting god) She is fucking horrible i will love her until i die and even after that

parks and recs jean ralphio voice she's the woooorst!! The moment she learns she has to kill someone to become a Lyctor (aka a more special necromancer), she doesn't hesitate to kill and cannibalize the guy who has been her cavalier since childhood… cavalier who she also totally bullied as kids, she was allowed to choose one guest for her and her twin sister's birthday party each year, and she would always pick whoever she thought her cavalier didn't want to see there! While other characters are shown to regret the process of becoming a Lyctor (which involves someone close to them dying)/were forced into it because of circumstances, Ianthe has absolutely no regrets, she believes she did what she had to do

The author once said of Ianthe: "I don't think she's been nice to anyone, if she has I'll go back and change it." She killed and ate the soul of someone she has known all her life so that she could become a necromantic saint and tormented him plenty before that. General negging, ganging up against him, always inviting people he didn't like to their birthday parties. She doesn't regret killing him. I think she is repulsed by the idea that his digested soul is affecting hers. She helped her crush lobotomise herself so she would be in Ianthe's debt, and later lied and said she didn't see the corpse of a woman her crush killed under her bed (why did she do that? I do not know). She has a bone arm because her original arm was cut off, she hated the replacement so her crush cut THAT off and grew her a new one out of just bones. She had it gilded and only after that did she decide to help her crush deal with the person who had been repeatedly trying to kill her. She wants so badly to be the main character but people keep interrupting her villain monologues.

she has her own content warning tag

She's such a bitch to everyone all the time, she causes nothing but problems, she tries to do a villain speech but fumbles it because her tummy hurt, she is the awfulgirl of all time

[jedimaesteryoda]

Do you find the Ironborn an interesting part of GRRMs story and/or world building?

The Ironborn are clearly inspired by the Vikings with the revanchist Confederate sympathizers. The tradition of the kingsmoot where they elected kings is a unique development, but only lords and men with enough property (a ship) get a vote. It's a society effectively controlled by pirates. They also have slavery in the form of thralls, and yet refuse to call it slavery with an attitude of "yeah, but it's not like those people" despite it still involving kidnapping people, and forcing them into a life of unpaid, forced labor and sexual violence for women.

As someone who supports anti-colonial movements in real-life, I find them interesting. They are the westernmost kingdom with a history of using their technological advantages in the form of iron when the mainland used bronze, as well as longships, to colonize and plunder the mainland and enslave the greenlanders under a Manifest Destiny doctrine. After they lost those advantages and lost their independence, they kept the Old Way going by appealing to an imagined past. This effectively makes them the most easily despised society in Westeros with a steady mix of the worst impulses: racism, misogyny, hypermasculinity and slavery and liable to turn on each other.

The Old Way is represented by the Greyjoys, a family with systemic abuse, few real relationships with one another other than with Balon, and a lot of infighting living in a literally crumbling castle falling into the sea. Balon launches a rebellion, fails, suffering big personal losses and is then "don't worry, it'll totally work this time." He is an old man clinging to the past, brooding alone in his tower as his house figuratively and literally crumbles around him. Victarion personifies the Old Way as is: an unhappy, hypermasculine dumbass warrior with his imagination constrained by the limits of his ideology, making him a tool easily manipulated. Euron is the Old Way as it appeals to the Ironborn: appealing on the surface but a predatory monster beneath who promises an impossible dream destined for disaster. The Ironborn take it given he is offering them emotion, and Ironborn are deeply unhappy as a people. The Old Way doesn't give them the happiness it promises, but plenty of disaster when their victims inevitably fight back.

The Old Way is riddled with hypocrisy with Victarion saying the Shield Island ships fleeing battle ceased to be men when they retreated when he did the same thing at Fair Isle. Aeron disdains maesters for choosing a life of service when he did as a Drowned Man. They begrudge Robert's forces' invasion and destruction of the Iron Isles when they glorify doing the same to others.

There are however those who support a New Way like The Reader and the three Harmunds before him.

There is clearly a struggle between the Old Way and the New Way within Ironborn society going on for centuries. The three Harmunds encouraged friendly relations with the greenlands and trade as well as literacy with Harmund III trying to outlaw the Old Way. The Shrike led a rebellion against Harmund III and it resulted in an invasion of the Iron Isles and the Famine Winter after that starved, impoverished and depopulated the Iron Isles with the New Way rebuilding the Iron Isles.

Quellon Greyjoy tried similarly until he died and Balon reversed his reforms. The Reader himself is an intellectual in a society that frowns upon literacy and scholarship, yet it's what allows him to effectively challenge Euron by pulling back the curtain on his tricks. He knows the dreams of reviving the Old Way is a pipe dream.

The attempts to revive the Old Way keep ending in disaster, taking more Old Way ideologues with them. And even without that, reaving had been on decline for a while and replaced with trade with men "returning with treasures their forebears had never dreamed of." Rather than driving them forward, the Old Way holds them back and has been slowly dying.

The current generation of Greyjoys just may be the last gasp of the Old Way.

[lu3ky777]

Tell us about the Elfonomics and Orconomics of the kingdom, please?

Elves are more sophisticated people, more democratic, and live a long time. They live for up to 500 years and their bodies tend to always look “elegant” with shiny hair and blemishless skin. Elves live as children for about 50 years and most carry the young minds ability to absorb information and change biases. The biggest elf tribes live in forests, in treetop societies. They also are constantly improving and advancing technologies like agriculture, architecture, magic, and weapons. They domesticated animals and their treetop villages were complicated and advanced allowing for great protection and for resources were able to move quickly amount the forest. Magic made this easier and with the advancements in magic and physical weaponry, their forests were like fortresses. Strategic positioning, bows, magic tomes, and camouflage meant they were able to fight invading armies of around 15X their army. Although elves were not very susceptible to sexual impulses, both biologically and socially. Elves aren't as perfect as they want you to believe they are. After all, logical thinking and longer lives don't make people any less greedy or prideful. The hierarchy of elves allow the “wisest” to rule through voting, an oligarchy where most fights were fought in arguments in debates where not the convincing gain power instead of actual intelligence. Elves once held an impregnable fortress but through their own vanity and greed became divided, with many elves choosing to leave their Forrest in order to see life differently. Their Forrest was filled with many tribes that lived with each other peacefully (or at least didn't fight each other basically ever) while all advancing certain aspects to prove that their tribe was the best.

Orcs on the other hand were their opposite, they were driven by emotion and instinct. Orcs' bodies were made to fight, survive, and repopulate. The average Orc was 6’1 by age 10, 6’9 by 20 and just kept getting better and stronger as they aged and fought. Orc babies were comparable to feral animals, violent and strong but they tended to listen to loud voices and orders. Orcs stopped maturing by the age of 10 as their minds and brains grow quickly to help them become stronger and more powerful. Orcs live in harsh areas with huge creatures or monsters, that or they pillage and occupy villages to feed themselves. Despite their massive strength and muscles they do struggle from not focusing on advancing technologies, very few orcs knew how to make axes most just using clubs or heavy objects. They also lacked armor and didn't have many medicines to cure diseases or infections though their bodies were highly resistant to most diseases. Contrary to many popular beliefs but Orc men and women all fight together and are considered equals, strength and power is what mattered to them more. They were all also very endowed, with huge cocks as well as breasts and asses on the female side. Orcs had a lot of libido and often got into orgies as “competitions” and fucked like crazy as Orcs wanted to create as many offspring as possible, this was offset by orcs generally pretty short lifespan. This was mostly because they died in battle or sickness, but orcs that lived longest tended to become “orc chiefs” or the bosses of their tribe. There were a few different types of Orc societies, mostly dependent on their advancements. Orcs that still used clubs and rocks tended to have the oldest act as leaders and bosses who gave order and had complete control, squishing those who challenged their power or being replaced by them. Orcs that had advanced to have weapons or sometimes armor were different, they were usually military controlled where the best battlers commanded respect but also had to manage a complex society with resources like food, weapons, and sex. The thing that held most Orc colonies back was their inability to develop at young ages and learn, but if they were taught skills like craftsmanship or iron melding they would become insanely powerful. An army of orcs with weapons and armor was one of the scariest things to imagine, a threat like that had once existed and multiple countries allied to stop the threat and even outnumbering them 10 to one barely survived. Only winning through clever tactics and long ranged weaponry and magic provided by elves. Currently the “Harlon” tribe is currently thought to be the strongest Orc tribe, they had many stolen weapons and the chief had a huge set of armor. They occupied and stole from local villages while dominating most of the “dead world” the most dangerous place on the map, huge monsters and animals lived there and as such the orcs feasted on them.

These two tribes are opposites in most ways, but combined they would be terrifying and near unstoppable. Orc strength and numbers combined with Elven magic and advancements would make either unstoppable. These two tribes however don't really mix, elves prefer not to fight and instead advance themselves while the Orcs need to keep taking and taking to satisfy themselves. In fact many elves have tried to leave and join Orc camps understanding this fact.. most were either enslaved or used, unable to handle the hard training and fighting that the orcs forced members of the tribe to do, or simply were betrayed or never were able to reason with them. So elven laws forbade Elves from joining orc tribes. So luckily for everyone the two sides would never be able to cooperate with each other and would stay separated preventing it from happening… Right?

[phyllitta]

Yall...

We're living in the Twilight Zone.

But I'm gonna say this...regardless if I get flagged or whatever bullshit..

The moment one of your shitty man child kids tells my 9 yr old niece, my sister, "your body, my choice", I'm gonna turn into the FBI and find out where the parents live, eat, shit..breathe..and beat your ass.

You want it old school then here ya go.

No more love and kindness for all.

You wanna pick and choose. Well pick and choose how you get fucked up.

Yall done lost your fucken minds.

"Show kindness, Show patience, Show love"

Show your stupid ass out the door because that shit didn't work.

Im the kindest person you know, but fucken feral to those that hurt my family and friends.

Im not gonna hold hands with those who willingly are oppressing the people who make this country live and breathe.

The excuses of the votes may have been purged, thrown away, gerrymandering... but for real, some of yall are just liars.

Accept the fact that this country isn't what you expected.

Accept the fact that old white men are giving you orders on how to live, eat, fuck, breathe and act accordingly.

And yes it's everywhere.

I can't believe in the small farming town I grew up in.

The town that was founded on the backs of "wetbacks", those same "wetbacks" who weren't even allowed to live in said small town they built with their own sweat and blood in the fields..well their grandsons and granddaughters largely voted for a white rapist who in turn calls them rapists and criminals.

This country didn't lose its mind. It's working the way it was meant too.

So no.. you come for mine, you threatened my family with that bullshit. I'll fuck you up.

Yall are caught up on 10 second happy quotes, and self diagnosis while people you know and supposedly care for are literally on the chopping block.

And when that time comes when yall realize that those eggs are now 8 bucks instead 6.

That oh getting rid of Fema and weather services was dangerous and sooooo fucken dumb. Especially..like what the fuck Florida?

or when you don't get that Christmas bonus because hey, your company now has to prepare for tariffs, and higher taxes.

Or when your wife or daughter, niece, mom, sister, aunt, grandmother etc dies because she's cattle...no one gives a fuck about cattle.

Or when you can't get your dick wet because women are now scared of every man they come across..

Or when your mom can't get the health care she needs because her social security is gone.

I don't wanna hear your shit.

I don't wanna listen to you whine..

You can fuck all the way off and suck that white massa dick.

P.s.

I told myself I wasn't going to do this, because everyone and their mom is posting this stupid shit, but apparently it's therapeutic.

It kinda is.

To a new chapter of fuck around and about to find out.

Fuck you.

[bookwyrminspiration]

I Need Bookrecs but I can’t Just look any up cause all I get is booktok stuff :/

please help

Well I can recommend some things I/people I know personally enjoy! I don't know what you like, so I can't tailor them specifically to you, but hopefully it's still a helpful start :)

(and if anyone would like to reblog with their own additions, that's welcome to!)

A Chorus of Dragons by Jenn Lyons: A series I've talked about a lot recently. High Fantasy with incredibly complex and thorough worldbuilding, following Kihrin, a thief raised in a brothel as he discovers an unwanted royal heritage and the knowledge that he is destined to destroy the world. With an entire cast of engaging, unique characters (several queer in various ways) that drive the story, follow along as past lives are uncovered and these people who want nothing more than to live in peace are forced to fight for that right and figure out how to save humanity from the jealous hubris of people who have lost sight of what horrors can be justified for the greater good.

The Memoirs of Lady Trent by Marie Brennan: A series written like memoirs by Isabella Trent, the most famous and accomplished dragon naturalist ever who redefined the world and how dragons are understood with her accomplishments. But before she can be recognized, she had to establish herself in the field as a young woman in a time when women can't even vote--but she refuses to give up and travels the world for her passion, recounting the places she's been, people she's met, cultures she's glimpsed, and dragons she's studied. Very engaging and grounded, realistic in its depictions, isn't afraid to tackle topics like how harmful the "not like other women" idea is and how gender roles are detrimental to everyone.

I Keep My Exoskeletons to Myself by Marisa Crane: I haven't read it, but my partner loves it. In this world, you gain a second shadow when you commit a crime, and Kris has one. And when her wife dies in childbirth, their new baby gains a shadow, too. Told as though Kris is talking to her dead wife, it examines grief, resistance, surveillance and prejudice, and is undoubtedly much better than I'm making it out to be with my vaguely informed knowledge.

The Bone Houses by Emily Lloyd Jones: A standalone about a girl trying to provide for her siblings as a gravedigger, one of the only ones left in her small village who's still cautious of the supposed undead magic on its outskirts. But when a map-maker with an unclear past shows up offering money in exchange for guidance to the fabled locations, she can't turn it down. Explores death and grief and learning to live on without the people you care about, very sweet and introspective.

Ordinary Monsters by J.M. Miro: The beginning of a new series, following two boys, Marlowe and Charlie, as they're discovered and taken to a mysterious institution for their magical gifts that allow them to access--in their unique ways--the space between life and death. But there are secrets at this institution and misguided ideas of how best to save everyone from the shadowed figure hunting down little Marlowe, driving their new small band of friends to action to try and keep everyone safe. This book is slow and deliberate, but charming; the kids all act their age and there's no romance, but plenty of finding and choosing your family.

The Expanse by James S.A. Corey: Phenomenal sci-fi set hundreds of years in the future; people are colonizing Mars and a marginalized, oppressed class of people live in the Belt. Tensions run high between all of them, but James Holden is just getting by as an ice hauler before his ship is blown up and he and a few others find themselves at the center of a conspiracy. An important woman's gone missing and when she's found, the very foundations of their world are shaken as a physically impossible biohazard rewrites history and science, taking the story to places beyond where the characters ever saw themselves going. I haven't read it myself, but my dad has and I've seen the show (which is incredible) and I really want to read it myself. Cast of distinct characters and the show is one of the most scientifically realistic out there

Kitchen by Banana Yoshimoto: A short, bittersweet standalone about grief. Following Mikage as she processes the death of her grandmother, she becomes close with one of her grandmother's friends from a flower shop and his mother, finding herself again and learning to live with it. Notable for its casual depiction of a trans character (that mother) in this book from the 1980s. It's a lovely read, introspective and thoughtful.

The Black Witch Chronicles by Laurie Forest: I'm not caught up with this one, but it starts following Elloren Gardner, granddaughter of the last prophesied Black Witch--but she doesn't have a single spark of magic in her blood. So she's starting at a new University to become an apothecary, but there finds her beliefs about the world--and her people's superiority--challenged as she's forced to room with two winged icarals, who she doesn't think even deserve to be here. The world turns out to be much more complicated than she thought and she needs to figure out where she actually stands. A high fantasy with a more in-depth world building, but I've only read the first 2 books so far. And in the first Elloren has a lot to unlearn, so prepare to cringe at her actions and thoughts for a hot minute--but the magic and politics of the world I remember being quite interesting.

Babel by R.F. Kuang: I've spoken about this frequently; a standalone about colonialism and language. About the literal power of words and necessity of violence. Follow young Robin Swift, taken from China as a child and given a new name so England can send him to Oxford, where his language can be used to power magical silver bars and strengthen the empire. But this exploitation of him and the people he's come to think of as family rests heavy on him, and a series of experiences drive his thoughts towards revolution and pain. Warning, this is a heavier book, especially for those who have personal experience with language/culture loss and disconnect, with the effects colonialism.

The Martian by Andy Weir: A standalone about an astronaut who gets stuck as the only person on mars when his crew has to flee the planet when a storm hits. Trying his best to survive alone until someone can hopefully come get him, the story is told through his Log entries--and he is quite the little shit of a narrator. Surviving on humor and fuck it we ball mentality, he's either going to survive and be famous for it, or die on mars and also be famous for that. An incredibly fun read that touches on the bonds of humanity and what we'll do to help others, and how hard people will fight to survive and keep their hope alive. This was also turned into a movie, and not a bad one!

[im2tired4usernames]

When you marry the live of your life and try to start a family but have complications and IUI is no longer a thing so you have to give up on that dream of children and remember according to who you voted for a marriage is only "husband wife with children" making your marriage void and a shame in the governments eyes you picked that for yourself

When your grandmother dies because she can't afford her blood thinner medicine because they've cut Medicare you did this

When your son gets diagnosed with type one diabetes and dies a slow agonizing death because you can't afford his insulin you did this

When your neighbor dies from an unknown illness because they can't afford doctor visits because Medicaid was cut you did this

When your diagnosed with cancer and you have to choose between your chemo or food, rent and utilities for your family you did this when you realize you can't even take work off because your dying you did this

When you realize your required to work 70 hours a week and overtime pay is a thing of the past you did this

When your neighbors are all rounded up and deported even though they came here legally and have all the paperwork to prove it "America is a country for Americans" right? When your 79 year old mother in law is deported will you hold your father in law's and wife's hands while they cry or will you tell them that too what do you tell the kids?

When your friends and coworkers have their marriages annulments what do you say to them? You know he's said he's not just coming for gay marriage but interracial marriage too in fact he's also said if you don't have biological children your marriage is void so?

When your daughters class mates are killing themselves because they're not seen as people because they're health care is void what do you tell her?

What do you say to the history books that you felt like certain people should not be allowed to live? That you felt like "gas prices" the cop out I've heard everyone say was more important then human lives?

When you finally learn what a tariff is and the taxes on every thing goes up by fifteen when it costs you thirty dollars more to buy that pair of shoes for work you did this to your self

When you find relgious freedom is not a thing and Christianity has taken control making it so you can't watch your favorite shows or movies you can't read those books anymore they've been deemed ungodly what do you say to everyone who doesn't have the same convictions? You think it's ok to drink beer on Sunday well the Christans in charge don't so. Your relgious freedom is forcing everyone regardless of their religion or lack of to learn it in school.

When you children come home from school, if they're lucky and you realize they haven't taught them much of all and your horrified your 14 son has no clue on state history remember you chose for them to uneducated

When your son n you fight because he wants to read a piece of fiction that the government deemed "to not have family values" remember when your child screams at his much he hates you you are the one who chose this

If the unthinkable happens and your child is shot in his classroom remember you chose this for your family.

When your wife is raped by her coworker and becomes pregnant then miscarriages and is put in prison for "murder" you did this

When four years are up and they've rewritten the constitution like they said they would changing the president terms and giving him complete power above the law, and made himself into a dictator remember when you can't vote anymore you did this.

What are you doin to say when history looks back on you because it will what do you say when the books paint you as an evil when they teach this in history when your grandkids go "wow grandad how could anyone vote for him didn't they listen didn't they hear all the warning signs why did someone chose hate and control why didn't someone stand up" what do you tell your grandkids that this is what you wanted that you were one of the nutters in their history books that chose violence and bigotry in exchange for your rights? You did this.

Do not be surprised when everyone else is dead that they come for you too.

To the men who voted for Donald Trump today:

When your girlfriend gets pregnant, and you’re not ready to become a father, and you’re forced into a position that cripples you emotionally, financially and irreversibly, remember: you did this.

When your sister’s pregnancy turns out to be ectopic, and she can’t get the life-saving medical care she needs and dies a completely pointless, preventable death, remember: you did this.

When your 12-year-old daughter is raped by her soccer coach — after he’s legally allowed to strip off her pants and peep at her genitals, because the existence of trans kids terrifies you — and she steals your shotgun and kills herself in your garage, remember, first and foremost: you did this.

Hundreds of thousands of people are going to die because of the decision you made today.

You did that.

[sometimesiammybpd]

i'm worried and nervous.

i don't want to make this stupid politically or whatever because tumblr right now is the only space i have that ISN'T that, but i can't keep it in my head. it's almost 5 am for me and today is election day. the big day between trump and harris. and it's so conflicting and depressing and scary and all the emotions. i voted for harris the first chance i got because i obviously am a very left person politically. and no, i don't support her in the slightest. the only good policy that she's made note of that i am in full agreeance with is the legalization / decriminalization of marijuana nationally. whether she actually means to do anything about that or if it's a typical political false promise designed to get her into office but also be something she had no point had any intention of acting upon is to be seen . . . assuming she wins.

somehow, for how bat-shit, off the walls crazy donald trump has become, his cult's feelings about him are the same as they were in 2016 or 2020. and yeah, it's not surprising. but it doesn't make it any less terrifying. the man has promised to be a "dictator on day one." a literal fucking dictator. he's promised to do a mass deportation on day one, regardless of the person's immigration status. half the shit he's promised is out of project 2025 (which legitimately has a part in it about how donald trump should not acknowledge his involvement with the project as it'll be better for his chances of winning). and y'know, being fearful over my friend's lives because they're afab and there's a 50% chance that by the start of next week, it could be determined that they'll lose their right to vote and choose. that their lives will no longer be in their control. and of course i have to mention LGBTQ+ rights too as that applies directly to me. and there's trump's endless threats about arresting or killing anyone who protests him or his regime. tell me all you want that he's not actually going to be able to do these things. go ahead. i won't believe you because he has already proven he will do whatever he feels necessary to get what he wants. look at what happened on january 6th. the "day of love" he refers to all the time. the day of love where people died. where his followers tried to hang his fucking vice president because he wouldn't do something he had no power to do. a day of love that was hyped up for months with trump promising his followers he'd be marching down pennsylvania avenue with them. well, except for the part where he wasn't. where he was on his phone and twitter and watching the rampage happen from the safety of being anywhere else. how this race is an even fucking split is beyond me. the man shits himself at rallies. he's worse off than biden at times mentally and somehow everyone on the right is conveniently not battling an eye.

i fully believe in the idea that within trump's first two years in office (again), they will invoke the 25th, remove him, put vance in his place, and then REALLY start their "reshaping" of the united states. and keep in mind, on the biggest issue that isn't happening in the us, they both are fucking awful and disgusting. kamala plays it neutral while very much still supporting the sending of weapons and aid to israel while trump outright is telling netanyahu to not go for a ceasefire and promising to even encourage him to be more aggressive and dangerous once in office. i think they both shouldn't be allowed in office based on this alone. however, and i hate this take so much but it's unfortunately true, voting for kamala at least ensures that should she win, you'll have the right to protest against her administration and against her policies. trump's made it clear how he'd respond.

all of this shit scares me because i am not even 22 yet and after the next few days, i might lose what's left of my country. i might lose my freedom or be arrested or worse. my friends might be arrested or worse. they'll lose their rights. and because people are so ignorant and stupid that they believe above all else that kamala didn't do enough as vp . . . who is literally just the tiebreaker, basically, they are voting for trump. and because he'll get as racist as possible, the reasoning is also that she is choosing to be black when she isn't, she isn't allowed to run because she's not a real citizen, and more. i want to live to see this country survive. i don't want donald trump in office, but it all feels so fucking hopeless. it's really hard to keep myself calm knowing that one option would turn the united states into a modern day nazi germany (trump wanted hitler's generals after all).

if you're as stressed as i am, get off social media for the day. stay away from the news and do whatever is your favorite hobbies or activities. put yourself in your own world where for even just a little, none of this has to matter. don't stress about where the polls are at and how close it is. the polls cannot tell you anything at this point other than that it's that close. everything else is as estimate or a guess.

*puts hand out* grab my hand. we'll tackle this together. because election season as a whole is a bitch. but election day is worse. so much worse. i got adventure time on the tv and a bong with a shitload of weed. we'll get through it :)

[facelessmonster]

I saw something online today that broke me.

The kind of broken that leads to ugly crying until you wish you could just be numb. But I'm not numb, I feel it in my core.

The kind of sadness that kills that part of your spirit that has hope. That little voice encouraging you to try to make the world a better place. The defeat that makes you feel so insignificant, powerless to systems of oppression, i swear another part of my soul died today.

I'm holding this pain alone, I can't imagine telling anyone about what I saw. I don't want anyone to feel the weight of this. It's suffocating but even while I feel my spirit slowing dying inside, I know this sadness won't be kind enough to just finish the job. I'll still be here tomorrow, more broken than yesterday.

I hate capitalism so much. I hate seeing how capitalism has destroyed so much. We're missing out on so much because of it. Life is short and I don't believe there is an afterlife. We have to make the best of what we have here and now. But when capitalism rules our lives... we don't stand a chance.

And when push comes to shove, the innocent and helpless are the first to be sacrificed. I know it sounds so dramatic, doesn't it? But think about it... when the money runs out, who suffers first?

Covid showed us that our society will sacrifice the sick, elderly, and minorities who work service jobs just so the people with privilege can continue to live a life of luxury.

The housing crisis is sacrificing innocent animals surrendered to animal shelters that can't handle the demand. Once loved pets will be euthanized because their families couldn't afford to live somewhere that allowed pets. And for what? So that property values continue to rise?

There are so many other things going on in our world that are so immoral. Contrary to what christians want us to believe, it's not Sam Smith and Kim Petras performing a song at the Grammy Awards. It's global warming. It's natural disasters. It's starving wildlife leading to extinction. Kids aging out of foster care while folks spend thousands to get pregnant because IVF is still cheaper than the costs of adoption. Homelessness because we allow people to vote against development of adequate housing. The death of a generation of queer kids who are forced to live a lie but choose instead to die in their truth.

The greed of society has impacts that are unmeasurable.

I may be "the most heartless person" my mother ever met, but I didn't start out that way. It's not my fault that our society ripped it out of my chest, still beating.

[tombeane-blog]

The Writer's Strike - Part One

“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously and, accepting both of them.”

George Orwell - "1984"

I've been mentally trying to organize three possible blogs - "Quantum Computing", "The Girl From Ipanema" and, "Artificial Intelligence versus The Three Stooges".

But something keeps interrupting these conflicting trains of thought because this writer's strike ticks me off.   

First: The unjust way we are programmed to care or not care about this, that, or the other.

Second: It is ultimately a losing cause i.e, trying to stop progress in order to protect jobs.  

Capitalism finds it's way forward no matter how much they try to destroy it.

Obviously, the sooner I transfer this organically grown homemade crapiola about this strike from my brain to yours, the sooner I can get back to more more important projects.

Yep, The Hollywood Writer's Strike and the quazillionaire movie stars who march bravely alongside their brothers in arms for a half hour on the weekend.

If Hollywood and the T.V. Industry stay on strike for even a quarter or a third of an eon, what is the downside?

Is it having more time for reading, watching old movies, learning a hobby, going outside, spending time with family and friends, traveling around or listening to Pink Floyd?

Don't get me wrong.  I feel sad for anyone who loses their livelihood through no fault of their own.  

I weep much less for those who voluntarily walk out just to get more money.  And I have none tears for those making millions of dollars while virtual signaling that it is all about standing up for the common man.  

As usual this is all about the money - no matter what they say.

I know, you know and he/she/them know that some of these striking writers make a metric ton of money and own gated homes overlooking the Pacific Ocean. 

We also know that not one single out of work blue collar Bud Light truck driver owns one of those houses.  

Even further, the writers chose to strike without caring about the thousands of poor working minionites forced into the unemployment line with them.

Who deserves our sympathy more?

And how do we as a society choose who to weep for?  Or is it not us that chooses?

It seems many of the ones who get the sympathy are the ones that are part of a favored group.  Trust me, there are few groups more favored than Hollywood elites.

After all, they tell us how to vote, when to wear masks, and who is allowed on social media.

"Oh no! The guy who wrote that genius dialog for those twelve Fast and Furious movies is out of a job! - For God's Sake, Somebody Please Help Them!"

"What's that? A Bud Light driver lost his job as a result?  And he had a wife and three kids and just bought a house?"(cue the cricket sounds...)

Maybe it is simply about the money.

Inner city deaths by gangs and child thugs kill thousands every year and more thousands die on the streets poisoned by Chinese Fentanyl.

"Hey babe, would you change the channel please. This is depressing"

Religious zealots crash into a building, killing some 3,000 people and America goes to war and spends billions upon billions of dollars and loses even more American lives.  "U.S.A.!  U.S.A.!"

No Americans died in Ukraine but there we are still - spending billions upon billions - a lot of it going to U.S. weapons manufacturers - while humongous problems plague every city and town in the U.S.

Thousands of these deaths or thousands of those deaths.  Those we should care about.  These we shouldn't.

Who is manipulating us?  This is worth saying twice.  Who is manipulating us?

We are told to choose who to sympathize with, who to reward or what we care about based on what?  Which is more newsworthy and attracts eyeballs? Which produces the most clicks?  Which produces revenue?  Or just which more closely aligns with the reigning ideological bent?

I just can't generate any sympathy for the Hollywood actors/writers and their overseers who preach to us about how to live our lives, who to love, who to hate and who to care about.  And they push Hate America and sewer trash on children - and are now crying for more money and guarantees of future revenue streams.

So who do we choose - voluntarily striking writers and Hollywood glitterati?  Or involuntarily out of work truck drivers, camera operators, grips, sound technicians, makeup artists, nearby restaurants and catering crews, et al, who are also out of work.

"You there on the right thrown into the unemployment line - sorry about that."

"You there on the left who walked out on your jobs - the nation is here to help."

But, they also say it's really about A.I. taking away their jobs...

[maryellencarter]

Short summary of that last link: the name "Copenhagen" in this case is a reference to the physics concepts like Schrodinger's cat and Heisenberg's uncertainty, where observing a situation changes it. As applied to ethics, it suggests that people (and corporations etc) who only do Something but not Everything about a problem, in our society, get blamed for attaching themselves to the problem -- actively observing it, causing it to be observed -- without completely eradicating it, while people etc who just totally ignore the problem are treated as innocent because they're not *involved*.

Which leads me to wonder -- so, mocking the trolley problem as reductively binarist is not a Tumblr-exclusive thing, it's pretty much the only way it's ever mentioned in pop culture. Obviously it doesn't land the way it's supposed to.

But what I'm now wondering is: maybe that's *because*, in its basic "you can make a bad choice or by inaction allow a worse result to occur", it fundamentally has to place you at a point where you're already observing the problem: where you're standing at that trolley switch actively deciding who lives or dies. It assumes you're already in a situation where, under Copenhagen ethics, blame attaches to you either way.

Which, you know, is what the trolley problem is supposed to be doing! But. The parallel in the original post is not quite exact, and it's inexact in a way that specifically, I think, reveals exactly why the concept of "Copenhagen ethics" is super relevant to the current voting situation.

Consider, if you will, a Minecraft minigame. A trolley problem has been set up inside the minigame. It has three tracks, with a switch that can be shifted to send our runaway minecart down any of the three. (For trolley problem purposes, we will assume that being hit by the minecart kills all the villagers placed on each track. It's modded or something.)

One track has a single villager placed to be killed on it, one has five villagers, and one has twenty. The initial setup will cause the minecart to kill five villagers if the player takes no action. The player can change the track to kill the single villager or the unit of twenty, but can make no other changes to the setup.

Now, let us say that this minigame has become a runaway social media sensation. A huge group of players are obsessed with killing as many villagers as possible, playing the 20-dead gamestate over and over again. There are hashtags. There are spinoff mods replacing the villagers with avatars of people who object to the 20-dead solution and adding graphic gore effects. There are flamewars. A smaller number of players are trying to make a case for the 1-dead solution, and not getting very far.

The social media sensation draws in people who, like so many of us, are convinced they have the perfect ethical solution to the problem. Under Copenhagen ethics, the solution is simple: don't play. Don't get involved. Make the choice to walk away. Don't boot up the minigame, and nobody dies.

People being people on social media, there would of course be a significant chunk of the do-nothing squad who would boot up the minigame and show themselves standing next to the minecart doing nothing as it zooms past to kill the five villagers. We'd all like to think we're not *that* stupid. Just stay a step further back, outside the minigame completely, and you're clean.

The catch -- pulling it back to the real world now -- is that the vast, vast majority of our "choose not to vote" population here in the States believe they *are* outside the minigame. That choosing not to vote or choosing not to register puts them in the position of an enlightened Minecraft player who says "That sounds like a crappy minigame, I'm not getting involved".

Which would be the smart and correct thing to do, if it *was* a Minecraft game. Unfortunately, every adult human in the US who has the ability to vote has already been trapped inside this minigame. The minecart is running. All each of us can decide is how best to reduce the total number of dead on our watch.

You know I used to think "tumblr's absolute refusal to actually engage with the Trolley Problem in favor of insisting that there must be a third, morally pure option that doesn't require them to make a hard decision and anyone who asks them to make a binary choice is just a short-sighted idiot is really fucking annoying, but I guess it's not actually doing any harm".

Anyway that was before we asked tumblr at large to decide between "guy aiding a genocide but making progress elsewhere" and "guy who would actively and enthusiastically participate in a genocide and would also make everything else much, much worse for everyone elsewhere" and the response was that there must be a third, morally pure option that doesn't require them to make a hard decision and that anyone who asks them to make a binary choice is a short-sighted idiot.

[dayables]

I'm glad you liked my yttd ramble the other day hahsjshsj. And I have some more stuff to say because this game lives rent free in my head.

I love the writing and storytelling from kimi ga shine, I really do but I think the way the later half of the second main game is structured, from a narrative point of view is kinda misleading. The whole focus of the last bit, with the Kanna vs Shin argument is on Kanna. Shin feels unsure and ungrounded so he resorts to interrupting her and abandons his calculated and calm facade he had until that point, which makes sense in a character point of view because it shows how he reacts when he is truly cornered. But it doesn't make sense considering afterwards the game clearly wants you to vote him. Honestly after playing the logic route the first time, the emotion route feels like a fever dream. It's all unicorns and rainbows and is such a contrast to the other option I wonder why we even had a choice in the first place. Unless further down the line there is some type of plot twist where our hope and optimism in the emotion route is punished I don't see why the game pushes so hard to make us feel guilty of killing Kanna in the Shin route. Honestly, after playing a chapter 3 full of internal conflict from Sara and other characters reacting to the traumatic nature of their situation, they seem so naive in the emotion route, idk if I'm explaining myself well enough. Like we fall into this weird bit where they will "for sure make it out alive" and Sara is determined to "bring everyone to safety", everything is "totally gonna be okay" and it just seems so... off? It makes no sense for them to think that right now, especially not after a failed escape attempt and seeing the way the floormasters and dolls can interfere with the game like Gashu did. (And knowing that even if they can take off their collars they will just be killed for desobying the rules from Shin's death)

On Kanna's death "cut scene" Sara literally thinks, and I quote "We need Sou to escape... / I... chose logic... / The worst possible choice..." what???? literally how? The whole point of this choice is that no matter which one it will always be a morally grey answer, there isn't a right or wrong here because either way you're killing one of your allies. And going back to the way the second main game is structured: the focus is all on Kanna so having Shin's death be the final arch for his character seems a bit out of touch. If we wanted that to be his big finale, if he's the one we're supposed to listen to, then why isn't he the one speaking for the majority of the time? The end of the discussion part is all about Kanna, Kanna's sacrifice, her whole speech about Kai's values and hope to defy the game and escape as a group, Kanna's wish to save Sou and Sara like she couldn't save her sister. Then why is listening the Kanna the worst choice? I think they were going for a "double final arch" per say, so you could in fact choose any of the two endings and still have a satisfactory conclusion but why did they have to push so hard afterwards for Shin's death to be "the right choice?". If that's just Sara's guilt speaking why doesn't she feel the same way (or at least the tiniest bit remorseful) for Shin?

And I know it's another level to the whole logic vs emotion, you either get a more satisfying narrative or a happier one but I don't think it had to be that different you know? That and the way the two deaths are handled makes it clear (even if unintentionally) that Nankidai gives priority to the emotion route. And when you can see that to this degree it makes me wonder why is this even a choice in the first place?

In conclusion, I seriously hope the emotion vs logic route isn't the thing that leads the player to a good vs bad ending. Or at least that it isn't as predictable as it seems right now, because if we are doomed right from the moment we chose to save Shin... idk it seems like a cheaper alternative to just have "save the child" as the objectively better ending. And again, I would personally make it so that the whole hero trope, happy-go-lucky nature of the characters in the emotion route would crumble somewhere during the final chapter, they can still have a happy ending but at least make it so that there are some consequences for choosing Kanna over Shin, literally anything at all. Them being suddenly almost unfazed by the deaths of their past allies is so out there it seems completely out of character. Like you said, Sara's stress doesn't come only from Joe's death and Shin's existence, it comes from leading a group of people to almost certain death, why is that no longer a problem? And if the difference between saving Kanna or Shin is more world building and knowledge later on then that needs to be a bigger difference between the routes because right now it's just Kanna good, Shin bad.

Anyways this turned out super long again but I just have. a lot of thoughts. I really do like Nankidai's storytelling, he does a very good job at it but when it comes to this? I think he made some questionable choices, I hope it becomes less linear in the future.

:DDD 

Once again, this is my thoughts explained so well, so I’m going to expand with my thoughts :)

First off,   the game clearly wants you to vote him. is very true. Shin’s death is nearly too perfect. Happy ending, a character arc wrapped up in a bow, constant praise for killing Shin and an even happier next part. A fever dream is the perfect way to describe the emotional route after playing logic  first. Everything about it, seems so off. 

What tipped me off, what really tipped me off, was Kanna’s  reaction to We hin’s death. Especially when compared to Shin’s. Whether or not it’s healthy is debatable but it is at the very least co-dependant. Kanna was manipulated by Shin. Whether or not she cared for him the same way he cared for her* is up for debate. 

*(we don’t have nearly enough context for a clear cut on her motives for her actions in part 2. Shin seems to be more concerned about saving Kanna specifically, while Kanna wants to save everyone including Shin. This can be linked back to her feelings of worthless. Yes, Shin is special to her, she mentions him and Sara. However, if they had not gotten close, Kanna likely would have made the same choice) 

Kanna, almost didn’t seem to care that he died, that everyone else might die (from her own perception of what could happen). For someone who is wrecked by grief and death so much, she’s, just as happy as everyone else? It’s so out of character that she isn’t a teeny bit distressed. 

See, the oh so happy attitude, part can be played off to Sara no longer being swallowed by self-loathing over Joe. She believes she can do it, and that will drastically affect how the part plays out. Yes, that is not where all her issues stem from. But, even that small weight could make all the difference in those moments.  I’m okay with that because Sara is allowed to be unreliable. It’s the others reactions. Everyone is just like her. It’s so surreal how everyone seems have gotten their own Joe AI through someone's death?

The narrative actively pushes that choosing Kanna is the better thing to do logically, while killing Shin is foolish and a choice made from emotions. We are pushed to kill Kanna then rewarded when we save her. It’s all so jumbled. It’s all so wrong. Now from a story telling perspective, it is okay to reward us for listening to our hearts. My issue with the emotional route isn’t that it’s one big happy family, (because how much of that is Sara believing that?). It’s the concept it’s pushed to be better, happier and the ending you want.  

As you said: Why is killing Shin a choice if it’s so bad? 

Is it to give the player an illusion of choice? 

It makes the emotion route so fever dreamish after finishing the emotion route. So jumbled. It makes it less satisfying but I believe it is for a reason. 

Right now everything is too linear. We either have the most important player in this game dead, or against us. It’s not like the Reko/Alice choice. This was so major, so why is it so linear? 

It’s unnerving, how happy the game is when the exact same thing is happening but bleaker when you save Shin. 

It’s terrifying. Everything is the exact same, but it’s not. And it’s something i’ve seen no one else who played emotion first get. Because I don’t know if you can exactly grasp how unnerving their happiness is (I obviously didn’t play emotion first but I’ve never seen anyone point it out despite most of tumblr playing emotion first) at first.

I am terrified of the emotional route for their being nothing bad. Because they’re are bad things and good things. in the logic route. 

Why is one route so happy and the other realistic? Why Nankadai? Why? 

I have belief that this is purposeful. I believe a game that creates dread so easily (look at how we’re all terrified of main games, Midori, part 3b)  and horror (just look at the deaths) is not creating the terror unintentionally. Especially when it’s so easy to miss. 

The fact it can be taken down to Kanna good, Shin bad, is a build-up for a crash. This game built up Kai surviving longer than the first game so well and look at how that went. It takes one slip and the happiness of emotion crashes down like glass. The logic route does not need to end happier, but all Shin needs is a push and the bleakness of Logic cannot hold up. 

These routes are resting on a needle. It takes so many mistakes (more than can be made in a single route) to unintentionally put them there. 

There is a lot of room for this to go wrong. You’re right, it’s bad writing right now for the routes that are so linear to be so different. It’s worrying, jumbled and does not make sense. I agree with you! The choices here are questionable. ^^, I just believe these are purposeful, especially when we don’t know what’s coming next 

[thosebizzareserpents]

Narcissa Malfoy sat on the front steps of Malfoy Manor. She saw smoke in the distance. She was escorted by Aurors back to her home alone. A figure was walking up toward the gates.

It was Millicent Bulstrode was one of Draco’s former housemates.

"Millicent! what are you doing here?"

"They're coming."

"I know. Draco and Lucius are still being held at the Ministry, the Aurors will bring them shortly." We have been put on house arrest."

"Not them.”

"Who's them?"

"The Dragon Wife and company. Your husband and son are being stalled."

"You don't smell it? Dragon fire has different smell."

"Dragon Wife?"

Tessie Prewett. Tessie's married name is MacFusty. It's said lions don't have patience but a lioness can wait for hours before hunting their prey. She's waited a long time.

Tessie has a list of five. The five Death Eaters who slaughtered her grand-nephews.

Lucius wasn't-

"No, but she took requests."

“My great-aunt Augusta Longbottom wants three. Three wixes who tortured her only child and daughter in-law into insanity. For her grandson who witnessed their torture. Can't have Grimmuald Place, that's Potter's now. Lestrange Place and Crouch Manor are nothing but ash.

Felix Rosier is with her. He has agreed to let the Rosier Chateau go. He has settled and made a home else.

Narcissa remeber that Felix Rosier was Evan’s younger brother who had become a dragonologist after graduating Hogwarts, he specialized in Peruvian Vipertooths. The youngest Rosier son rarely returned home and didnt care for his father's views of pure-blood supremacy.

"The Last of the Bones Family. Owen Bones brother of Amelia and Edgar and his daughter Susan should have ten. Forty really, for the brutal massacre of his brother Edgar, sister-in-law and their children. Mr. Malfoy was there."

They said no.

The daughter of Benjy Fenwick, Marlene Mckinnon, her godson, Caradoc Dearborn's sister and grandson also said no.

“McKinnon!? But she is -

Sorry the ghost of Marlene McKinnon also had a vote.

But there was a tie breaker.

Dedalus Diggle also said yes.

They cant-

"Why, because you saved The Boy Who Lived with a single word Mrs. Malfoy?"

Because you changed the tide of the war?

"Why should you, Narcissa Malfoy get pass?"

Does that make up for the years you have been loyal to Voldemort?

"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind says the man with both eyes intact."

"Eleven years you had Draco before he stepped one foot into Hogwarts. Some would argue that he is a product of his environment, but there are many who have broke free from centuries old notions."

You are thought of as a wife who willfully and dutifully followed her husband's schemes. A mother to take not a mark of honor but who allowed her son to be branded like cattle. Draco's not yours anymore, he's Voldemort's even after death. Just like your younger cousins Regulus and Evan.

"Others witness their mothers death before their very eyes why should you be shown mercy?"

"They'll wait until given the go ahead and bring your husband and son home. Nothing's changed yet, there are archaic rules that are still place."

“This is one of them."

“You named your son after the very creature that's coming to kill you and set ablaze to everything he has ever known. It is poetic justice to some." Nothing rises from dragon ash."

 I heard your that your mother Druella Rosier named you after narcissus flower, the daffodil and not a star."

"Why?"

"My father thought me selfish before I could even form a thought. Cygnus Black III the last of the Black swans had no male heirs. My mother begged Aunt Walburga, the matriarch of the Black family that I have a name of her choosing. I am only sister to wear stars."

"The flower was a symbol of my mother's mother. Petite Jonquill.

"I won't let them kill you, take my hand Mrs. Malfoy.” 

“Your great-grandmother wishes to see you.”

"Violetta, but she died over sixty years ago!"

"On the contray your great-grandmother is very much so alive and well."

[despair-vs-hope]

(spoiler warning) don't know if this went through but i'll try again, could i have Kokichi's s/o steps in to take Gonta's place for his execution because they couldn't believe Kokichi would do that to Gonta so they make kokichi choose between them or Gonta to be executed.

I will not deny that I got a bit carried away with writing this, but still hope that you enjoy it! - Mod Kiibo

After a long trial, in an attempt to reveal the blackened killer of Miu Iruma, the truth was finally revealed by none other than Kokichi. To which of course was rejected by everyone that believed it to be a sinister lie of Kokichi’s. But much to their dismay, it was a sickening truth that exposed the friendly giant demeanor of Gonta to be conflicting with the group’s decisions for action in regards to the trial.

His confession made your heart sink to what felt like your stomach. You had gotten so used to his tendency to lie, that you had almost brushed it off as another of Kokichi’s lies, but you had known it was a fact after considering the behaviour of Gonta in the virtual reality suspicious.

The fact that Gonta never recalled what happened in the virtual reality, only made the truth more clear. The moment when Kokichi had yelled at Gonta to defend himself, to prove that he wasn’t the culprit made the tension of the trial room to emit such emotion that everyone felt that they were reaching the climax of the trial. But with such approaching, emotions were high. Kaito and Kokichi butting heads over the survival of the class, to which made you feel overwhelmed.

When Gonta expressed his guilt of making everyone angry and him not being able to provide evidence or knowledge to what happened made you process something. You think that Shuichi had the same gears turning in his head.

“Hold on a moment!” You interjected, everyone looked at you, “Gonta saying that he doesn’t know anything from the virtual world may be something to do with how he was acting in the virtual world.” You explained your train of thought.

“What do you mean, S/O?” Kiibo questioned, in an almost becking for you to continue on.

“Well something seemed to be off when Gonta volunteered to watch over Kokichi, leaving him more susceptible to being manipulated to Kokichi. Then after the whole bridge thing and in the chapel, something was different about Gonta, I thought it was just me, but now I’m thinking that something caused such a difference in Gonta.” You continued your explanation, to which triggered Shuichi to realize something.

“Then that would mean something happened between the time before and after Gonta had logged onto the virtual world.” Shuichi added, then pondered to himself. “No, it was when he was logging in, when there was an ‘avatar log in error’. So that would explain his forgetfulness of the virtual world and the behaviour change that S/O noticed.”

“The memory and consciousness cords!” You exclaimed.

“If he mixed the consciousness and memory cords, then there’d be an error with memory.” Kokichi chimed in, understanding what the new evidence meant, “Like…an error that won’t let you bring your avatar’s memories to the real world…”

Then all came together when Gonta confessed that he confused his left and right directions, and that he was in a sleeping trance when he logged into the virtual world. But the questions still  remained: what was Kokichi’s motive and why did Gonta do it?

With some arguing and begging, Kokichi finally agreed that he would explain why it had to only be Gonta through the process of elimination. As he gave the names and made Shuichi explain why they couldn’t be possible suspects, to which Kokichi added on and ran the show.

As Kokichi got to himself, and Gonta as the remaining suspects, Kaito accused Kokichi again of being the blackened, to which you annoyingly yelled at him to shut up.

“Kokichi explained so many times that he couldn’t kill Miu, get it through your head that he isn’t the killer.” You were harsh with your words, but they were of good intent.

Kokichi grinned at you, “Seeee? Now if some of you understood how this killing game works like S/O and Shuichi, you would have seen who the culprit is. Now tell me, who’s left on the list?” His grin turned sinister when he looked at Shuichi.

“I…it’s Gonta.” Shuichi answered in hesitance.

Even after Kaito tried to provide some sort of evidence to prove Gonta innocent, Shuichi proved him wrong and everyone could feel the betrayal.

“That can’t be true..” Kaito sighed in resistance to defeat.

“Enough!” You shouted, gathering everyone’s attention. “You all don’t want Gonta to be the killer, right? So, I may as well offer myself up, there isn’t a rule about not doing that.”

“Just like in the Hunger Games!” Tsumugi exclaimed.

“S/O.. what are you doing?” Kokichi questioned, staring at you in a way that made you feel hesitant.

You smiled sadly, “Nobody feels that Gonta is responsible and I don’t want you to die. I’m partially responsible for Gonta’s actions for not saying anything about his situation, so it makes sense.”

“S/O, we already discussed that the person who carried out the action is the blackened. I’m the one who planned it, so we aren’t the blackened.” Kokichi argued in a tone that sounded hurt, conflicting with your response.

“So what?! In a way, I forced him hand, I was the action for not stepping up and telling anyone!” You defended yourself then looked at Monokuma, “Can it be allowed, just this once? Please? I volunteer to die in place of Gonta Gokuhara.” Your voice sounded strong and sure of what you were doing.

“S/O..” Gonta whimpered.

“Okay stop being stupid! You can’t do that, we proved Gonta to be the culprit and now he has to die!” Kokichi sounded desperate and frustrated, just like when was telling everyone the truth that they so adored.

“Hmmm..” Monokuma pondered as he considered the sudden suggestion. When he had a malicious grin, he let out a signature laugh. “It seems that everyone is feeling such despair, I wouldn’t be opposed to it! Phuu Phuu Phuu! Let’s have a vote, to execute Gonta Gokuhara or S/O?”

Kokichi was in utter disbelief, not like the others, but he felt utter despair in this situation. He was forced to vote between the actual culprit and the person he cared for most. Now he may lose them due to a plan to win the killing game, he wanted them to survive at least. He knew very well that he and S/O were alienated from the rest of the group and that they cared for Gonta more. They would execute S/O, he knew they would, they pretended to be good people.

“Kokichi.” He heard his beloved S/O call to him, “Please vote.” They begged, making his lips to tug down into a frown.

“It isn’t fair.” He gritted his teeth, “Why should you pay for Gonta’s crimes, when you were busy being nice to those idiots who were going to betray you in the end when given the choice!” He could feel the tears sting his eyes as they threatened to spill.

There were only four votes yet to be placed, those belonging to Shuichi, Gonta, you and Kokichi. Only 3 of the already published 5 of the votes were to you being executed, sure it hurt a bit, but you asked to be executed.

Kokichi was choked up that he was forced to vote, yes he would vote for Gonta, only after convincing you to vote for him as well. Shuichi was hesitant to vote, due to there not being a wrong answer and someone would die no matter. Gonta himself didn’t want to vote entirely.

“Guys, just vote for me, you’re better off. Gonta is more useful and cherished, you get the answer you fought for. Just let him live, c’mon.” You tried to reason with the remaining voters.“You sound like you’re trying to convince yourself too.” Kokichi pointed out, “Why would you sacrifice yourself when you’re afraid to die yourself? And you’d be… leaving me!” At that very moment, you thought that Kokichi would crumble right before everyone. The way he clutched the railing in front of him and sent a look at you that gave you impression that he was breaking down.

He was right, you were the only one who accepted him and comforted him. You were about throw it all away in his eyes.

You then noticed that you were crying, making you avoid all eye contact with the class.

That made Gonta break down.

“Gonta can not let S/O die for Gonta, when S/O did not…. kill Miu!” He sobbed and voted for himself.

Now the voting was all equal with three left.

“Kokichi it’s better f-for everyone else if this happens.” You argued, trying to convince him, but he began to yell again.

“But what about YOU?! You’re always concerned for everyone else, that’s what got us into this mess! Gonta’s right, you didn’t kill Miu.”

“But I’m still a cause, it could have been prevented!” You fought back, but then contradicted yourself, “In a way, I’m glad Miu died instead of you. The fact that I am glad that some died is inhumane and deserving of death myself!”

At that moment, you voted for yourself to die.

Kokichi was taken aback that he couldn’t convince you to vote for Gonta. In that very moment, Kokichi knew that Shuichi was his only way of saving your life.

“Is it really fair for someone to die for a crime they didn’t commit?” He asked Shuichi in a quiet tone, then pressed the button to vote for Gonta.

Nobody spoke a word, as Shuichi felt the pressure. Whoever he voted for, would die and their fate was in his hands.

Shuichi put himself in the shoes of someone who didn’t know Gonta and S/O and who they would vote for.

“I’m sorry Gonta.”“LET THE EXECUTION BEGIN!”

——–

The aftermath of the trial was filled with hurt feelings and betrayal.

Before anyone could leave the trial room, Kokichi ran towards you and hugged you.

“What the hell were you thinking?!” He shouted, the tears he tried to hold back beginning to spill from his violet eyes.

You rubbed his back and apologized for causing him such grief and promised to not take their life together for granted again, all with a heavy heart.

[littlemarie4]

A 1964 speech should not be so relevant today, yet here we are:

https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/ronaldreaganatimeforchoosing.htm

Program Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen, we take pride in presenting a thoughtful address by Ronald Reagan. Mr. Reagan:

Reagan: Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you and good evening. The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script. As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.

I have spent most of my life as a Democrat. I recently have seen fit to follow another course. I believe that the issues confronting us cross party lines. Now, one side in this campaign has been telling us that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity. The line has been used, "We've never had it so good."

But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future. No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income. Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share, and yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in. We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years. We've raised our debt limit three times in the last twelve months, and now our national debt is one and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world. We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury; we don't own an ounce. Foreign dollar claims are 27.3 billion dollars. And we've just had announced that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.

As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely. Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace? There can be no real peace while one American is dying some place in the world for the rest of us. We're at war with the most dangerous enemy that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars, and it's been said if we lose that war, and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours, history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening. Well I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers.

Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, "We don't know how lucky we are." And the Cuban stopped and said, "How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to." And in that sentence he told us the entire story. If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to. This is the last stand on earth.

And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.

This is the issue of this election: whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people. But they've been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves; and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say, "The cold war will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says, "The profit motive has become outmoded. It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state." Or, "Our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century." Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the President as "our moral teacher and our leader," and he says he is "hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document." He must "be freed," so that he "can do for us" what he knows "is best." And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government."

Well, I, for one, resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government" -- this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

Now, we have no better example of this than government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years. Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled. One-fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85% of the farm surplus. Three-fourths of farming is out on the free market and has known a 21% increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce. You see, that one-fourth of farming -- that's regulated and controlled by the federal government. In the last three years we've spent 43 dollars in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don't grow.

Senator Humphrey last week charged that Barry Goldwater, as President, would seek to eliminate farmers. He should do his homework a little better, because he'll find out that we've had a decline of 5 million in the farm population under these government programs. He'll also find that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress [an] extension of the farm program to include that three-fourths that is now free. He'll find that they've also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government. The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals. And contained in that same program was a provision that would have allowed the federal government to remove 2 million farmers from the soil.

At the same time, there's been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees. There's now one for every 30 farms in the United States, and still they can't tell us how 66 shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace and Billie Sol Estes never left shore.

Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy, but how -- who are farmers to know what's best for them? The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program. The government passed it anyway. Now the price of bread goes up; the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.

Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal the assault on freedom carries on. Private property rights [are] so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be. In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio, a million-and-a-half-dollar building completed only three years ago must be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a "more compatible use of the land." The President tells us he's now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we've only built them in the hundreds. But FHA [Federal Housing Authority] and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosure. For three decades, we've sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan. The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.

They've just declared Rice County, Kansas, a depressed area. Rice County, Kansas, has two hundred oil wells, and the 14,000 people there have over 30 million dollars on deposit in personal savings in their banks. And when the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.

We have so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one. So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning. Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer -- and they've had almost 30 years of it -- shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing?

But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we're told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We're spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.

Now -- so now we declare "war on poverty," or "You, too, can be a Bobby Baker." Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add 1 billion dollars to the 45 billion we're spending, one more program to the 30-odd we have -- and remember, this new program doesn't replace any, it just duplicates existing programs -- do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic? Well, in all fairness I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated. This is the youth feature. We're now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps [Civilian Conservation Corps], and we're going to put our young people in these camps. But again we do some arithmetic, and we find that we're going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help 4,700 dollars a year. We can send them to Harvard for 2,700! Course, don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.

But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help? Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles. He told me of a young woman who'd come before him for a divorce. She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh. Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer earning 250 dollars a month. She wanted a divorce to get an 80 dollar raise. She's eligible for 330 dollars a month in the Aid to Dependent Children Program. She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing.

Yet anytime you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals. They say we're always "against" things -- we're never "for" anything.

Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.

Now -- we're for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age, and to that end we've accepted Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.

But we're against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings, when they charge that any criticism of the program means that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood. They've called it "insurance" to us in a hundred million pieces of literature. But then they appeared before the Supreme Court and they testified it was a welfare program. They only use the term "insurance" to sell it to the people. And they said Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government, and the government has used that tax. There is no fund, because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that Social Security as of this moment is 298 billion dollars in the hole. But he said there should be no cause for worry because as long as they have the power to tax, they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble. And they're doing just that.

A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary -- his Social Security contribution would, in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee 220 dollars a month at age 65. The government promises 127. He could live it up until he's 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security. Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis, so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they're due -- that the cupboard isn't bare?

Barry Goldwater thinks we can.

At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence that he had made provision for the non-earning years? Should we not allow a widow with children to work, and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband? Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do? I think we're for telling our senior citizens that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds. But I think we're against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program, especially when we have such examples, as was announced last week, when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt. They've come to the end of the road.

In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested that our government give up its program of deliberate, planned inflation, so that when you do get your Social Security pension, a dollar will buy a dollar's worth, and not 45 cents worth?

I think we're for an international organization, where the nations of the world can seek peace. But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization that has become so structurally unsound that today you can muster a two-thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations that represent less than 10 percent of the world's population. I think we're against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies because here and there they cling to a colony, while we engage in a conspiracy of silence and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.

I think we're for aiding our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs, but we're against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world. We set out to help 19 countries. We're helping 107. We've spent 146 billion dollars. With that money, we bought a 2 million dollar yacht for Haile Selassie. We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya[n] government officials. We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity. In the last six years, 52 nations have bought 7 billion dollars worth of our gold, and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So, governments' programs, once launched, never disappear.

Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth.

Federal employees -- federal employees number two and a half million; and federal, state, and local, one out of six of the nation's work force employed by government. These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards. How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant? They can impose a fine without a formal hearing, let alone a trial by jury? And they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine. In Chico County, Arkansas, James Wier over-planted his rice allotment. The government obtained a 17,000 dollar judgment. And a U.S. marshal sold his 960-acre farm at auction. The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.

Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six-times candidate for President on the Socialist Party ticket, said, "If Barry Goldwater became President, he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States." I think that's exactly what he will do.

But as a former Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration, because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, the great American, came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his Party was taking the Party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin. And he walked away from his Party, and he never returned til the day he died -- because to this day, the leadership of that Party has been taking that Party, that honorable Party, down the road in the image of the labor Socialist Party of England.

Now it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people. What does it mean whether you hold the deed to the -- or the title to your business or property if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property? And such machinery already exists. The government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute. Every businessman has his own tale of harassment. Somewhere a perversion has taken place. Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile, so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.

Our Democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues. They want to make you and I believe that this is a contest between two men -- that we're to choose just between two personalities.

Well what of this man that they would destroy -- and in destroying, they would destroy that which he represents, the ideas that you and I hold dear? Is he the brash and shallow and trigger-happy man they say he is? Well I've been privileged to know him "when." I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office, and I can tell you personally I've never known a man in my life I believed so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing.

This is a man who, in his own business before he entered politics, instituted a profit-sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it. He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees. He took 50 percent of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees. He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work. He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores. When Mexico was ravaged by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.

An ex-GI told me how he met him. It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War, and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas. And he said that [there were] a lot of servicemen there and no seats available on the planes. And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, "Any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such-and-such," and they went down there, and there was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane. Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long, he'd load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.

During the hectic split-second timing of a campaign, this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer. His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said, "There aren't many left who care what happens to her. I'd like her to know I care." This is a man who said to his 19-year-old son, "There is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness, and when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have, then you have a real start." This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war. And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I've discussed academic, unless we realize we're in a war that must be won.



Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer -- not an easy answer -- but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.

We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters." Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace -- and you can have it in the next second -- surrender.

Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face -- that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand -- the ultimatum. And what then -- when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we're retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he's heard voices pleading for "peace at any price" or "better Red than dead," or as one commentator put it, he'd rather "live on his knees than die on his feet." And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us.

You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin -- just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard 'round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn't die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it's a simple answer after all.

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." "There is a point beyond which they must not advance." And this -- this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater's "peace through strength." Winston Churchill said, "The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits -- not animals." And he said, "There's something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty."

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.

We will keep in mind and remember that Barry Goldwater has faith in us. He has faith that you and I have the ability and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.

Thank you very much