#Functions of International Organisations

[psychotrenny]

I think one of Imperialism's most evil strategies is the national scale torture you'll see inflicted on countries that dare to dream of freedom. Like it's not just about overthrowing the anti-imperialist regime itself, but utterly breaking the very social, economic and in turn psychological foundations it's built upon. Prolonged periods of destruction that are as systematic as they are sadistic with the aim of making life unlivable until the government either collapses or gives in, accepting whatever concessions are forced upon them as the nation is remoulded into an dependent and obedient little neocolony.

Sometimes an imperialist power will act directly to achieve this (just take the gratuitous and deliberate destruction of civil infrastructure during the bombings of Yugoslavia and Iraq), but the preferred strategy is to employ local proxies. Groups like RENAMO in Mozambique or the Contras of Nicaragua. Bands of reactionaries, traitors and general desperadoes are gathered up, trained, armed and transported over the border at the expense of the Imperialists and their local collaborators. These armed groups have no interest in build mass support, of representing an alternative way of life. Their only purpose is destruction; killing, torturing, looting, burning whatever they can in order to bring their country to its knees. Frequently targeting important nodes in the networks that sustain the nation and the people's faith in it (bridges, rail depots, factories, hospitals and schools) but ultimately happy to attack whatever they can; every house burned or person tortured contributes to the climate of terror and corrosion of government credibility. Because when they kill these groups don't like to do it cleanly; their attacks generate countless reports immolation, disembowelment, victims hacked to pieces and left to bleed. But when possible they prefer to leave their victims alive and capable of further spreading their terror, inflicting the most vicious sorts of rape and mutilation on a mass scale

It's not just just evil for the sake of evil mind you. The cruelty has a point; human destruction to accompany the physical. Every person killed is someone who can no longer contribute to the development of the nation, while even living yet physically and psychologically broken victim places further strain on their country's increasingly fragile support systems. Meanwhile the terror of these actions spreads the impact beyond their immediate victims. The murder and torture of peasants makes the survivors too scared to go back into their fields, slowly starving the nation as the rural economy grind to a halt. The gruesome deaths of traders and travelers leaves the survivors too terrified to continue their business, shutting down the distributive networks that make national development and often life itself possible. The terror unleashed on foreign professionals can prompt the survivors to flee and discourage newcomers from arriving, depriving the underdeveloped economic and education systems of the skilled workers they need to improve or even function. And every broken body, ever broken mind, is proof of the government's weakness and ineptitude; a humiliating failure to protect their own people that demoralises supporters and empowers dissenters. The motivated sadism of these terrorist attacks is a microcosm of the motivated sadism displayed by their Imperialist backers

But why go to all this trouble? Why not just send in the paratroopers or organise a coup to end those troublesome regimes quickly? Sometimes it's a matter of possibility. As great as they are, the powers of Imperialist nations are not unlimited. All manner of constraints (domestic unrest, international condemnation which advantages dangerous rivals, the simple financial and human costs of such operations) limit what actions are viable or desirable. This is especially significant when the targets are motivated and disciplined anti-imperialists with a base of deep-rooted popular support, the sort of regime that won't go down to a simple commando raid or bribe to the right general. But sometimes, it's not enough to merely cut down a dissenting government; you have to salt the earth and make sure nothing similar ever grows back. I'll finish with the words of an anonymous Jesuit priest, talking about Nicaragua yet in terms widely relevant enough to be published in John Saul's conclusion to A Difficult Road: The Transition to Socialism in Mozambique (1985):

In Chile the Americans made a mistake. They cut off the revolution too abruptly. They killed the revolution but, as we can see from recent developments there, they didn't kill the dream. In Nicaragua, they're trying to kill the dream

[naxalbari1967]

How did the Inca Empire function without money? 

Books I'm referencing here are 1491: The Americas Before Columbus by Charles C Mann, and The Last Days of the Incas by Kim MacQuarrie.

The latter goes into more detail of how the Inca Empire functioned as it operates as a chronicle of the Spanish Conquest of what would later be known as Peru by Francisco Pizarro. In essence, the Inca Empire didn't have a large amount of free, internal trade as we would understand it in European cultures.

In the Inca society, all lands belonged to the Inca and were used with his permission. The structure was fairly typical of feudalism, with a strongly defined hierarchy from the Inca down through increasingly regional Chiefs, to the populace.

The Inca tithe system operated purely on labour. A typical household would have a quota of three months per year in labour for the state. This was considered to be service directly to the Inca, and is also where tribute comes from.

This work might have been to fabricate Vicunya garments for the Inca, it may have been for building roads or bridges, serving in the military, or making weapons. The tribute would be distributed to local warehouses, where it would then be distributed to where it needed to be. It might be that llama wool was woven into nets in one area, to be eventually moved across to a coastal city for use in fishing. The fabricator typically wouldn't leave their home further than the local warehouse to deposit these goods. (Unless they were called to serve somewhere specifically, like a construction project or military campaign.)

This system was incredibly efficient. Numerous Conquistador accounts note warehouses piled high with goods, as the Empire tended to overproduce materials under this system. It also gave incredible resilience to food supplies, allowing a 2000 mile long empire of ten million people to operate for 90 years apparently without a single major famine.

Communication was also quite sophisticated. Runners called Chaski would operate in relay. Apparently this allowed a message from Cajamarca to reach Cusco, a distance of 1100 miles over mountainous terrain, in only five days. Atahualpa was able to operate his empire in captivity entirely through these runners, organising literal tonnes of gold and silver to be delivered across to Cajamarca within the span of months. It was also difficult to intercept the messages, as there was no writing. One would have to capture the Chaski himself and get the message from them. Serving as a Chaski was also a labour tithe option.

This also means, however, that the message dies with the Chaski. The Spanish used this to terrifying effect as their horses could cover ground far faster, and thus Chaski struggled to get the message out about the initial invasion. The fact that the Inca was the nexus of all these communications was also a key weak point. The capture of Atahualpa at Cajamarca by Pizarro completely stalled the empire until he was able to negotiate resuming his duties, in exchange for gathering gold and silver for the Conquistadors.

[cathkaesque]

At the [Ethical Consumer] conference, Catherine McAndrew tells the story of an agricultural workers strike in Morocco in 2021. McAndrew works for Landworkers’ Alliance, a union of small farmers and land-based workers affiliated to La Via Campesina, an international organisation of agricultural workers’ unions with 200 million members in 81 countries. McAndrew has been involved in many strikes and worker-led social justice campaigns, including amongst Almeria’s Sea of Plastic — as recently featured in The New Climate. But her Morocco experience remains raw.

“It was on a farm called ‘farm 9’, which belongs to an agribusiness called Azura, which employs about 16,000 people”, recounts McAndrew. Farm 9’s name nods to the faceless anonymity of industrialised agriculture — just one number amongst 80+ farms in Morocco, which mostly export tomatoes to the UK. When the farm workers tried to form a union, they found that they were getting their pay docked for attending union meetings. Following a short half hour protest outside their place of work, McAndrew alleges, the union shop steward “was beaten up by two of his managers in the green houses” and later dismissed.

In response and solidarity, the workers went on strike “from the middle of December 2021, to the beginning of January 2022. So six weeks they were camped outside the farm, literally living in tents”, continues McAndrew. “And on the second of January, the company parked cars outside the gates and made it very difficult for the workers to picket safely. It was next to a major works and one of the workers was killed. Her name was Sabah Dinar. She was 30 years old. She had been at the tomato picker at that farm for nine years, and she left behind four children between the ages of three and 12.” Not that you would be able to gauge any of this from Azura’s glossy sustainability reports, with whole sections on ‘A relationship of trust with our stakeholders’ and ‘Sustainability, the lifeblood of our company’.

McAndrew, however, is keen to stress that Dinar’s tragic story represents just the tip of the iceberg. It is the price developing countries pay for developed countries’ growth.

Sometimes it’s the people themselves who are exported, with clear echoes to the chattel slavery and indentured labour that children in the Global North only learn about in history books. In Huelva, Spain, around 15,000 berry picking workers (again, mostly exported to UK supermarkets) are hired from Morocco through a process called ‘contract in origin’; meaning the workers are tied to specific farms and in effect can’t leave. The Landworkers’ Alliance have evidence of Moroccan workers living in barracks, tagged with GPS trackers. Omar (not their real name), a black worker from Gambia, received €45 for a 6.5 hours of work, picking 40kg of produce. The blueberries are then sold at £12 (€15) a kilo in British supermarkets. As a result, this is Omar’s house:

These aren’t mere glitches in an otherwise well-functioning system. This is the system. Never-ending growth on a planet with finite resources must become, by definition, increasingly extractive, exploitative, and destructive. Capitalism requires losers in order for there to be winners. It’s all there in the image of Omar’s house. Omar lives in the foreground of the picture, in a shanty hut made from salvaged plastic from the polytunnels he must work in. In the mid-distance, people look on from relatively comfortable apartment dwellings — albeit not a prime location, due to the unwanted view, with lower rent than more affluent ‘leafy’ neighbourhoods. And high in the blue sky above in the picture, far from view, are playboy Billionaire space tourists stretching their legs on spacewalks (if I’d have written that sentence even five years ago, it would have seemed grotesque hyperbole — but now, thanks to rocketing inequality levels, it is true).

But where does growth come into this? Catherine McAndrew again: “Growth, in an economic sense, is typically measured as an increase or decrease in GDP, gross domestic product, which is a measure of how much economic activity occurs in a country… it is a sum of every transaction, every purchase, every wage, every investment. Countries need to be seen as growing in order to attract new investments and to be able to borrow money on international markets at affordable rates.” Poor countries, largely those who have been previously Colonised, their goods and materials pilfered in order to develop the now developed countries, are not offered affordable rates. Credit rating agencies charge them much higher interest rates compared to developed countries. Borrowing costs are so high that 3.3 billion people — around 40% of humanity — live in countries that spend more on interest payments than on health or education. “This setup — of measuring everything in dollars and measuring everything in terms of a growing market — keeps rich countries rich and poor countries poor”, summarises McAndrew.

[ranticore]

this may be too big a question to easily answer, but how does the internal experience of a kattakati.... work? what does it feel like to claim something out of your control as a part of yourself? or to loosen up your grip on "identity" enough to allow an independent entity to fit within it without contradiction? do they perceive each other as independent, even? or is it a given that a part of yourself will retain autonomy and it just doesn't bother them much?

so zeta developed extremely differently to the other sirenians and are more influenced behaviourally and psychologically by their genetic engineering, so their points of view are slightly different on a population-wide level. for zeta, the formation of a kattakati bond is a distant extension of their genetic engineering. the engineers basically went into their brains with a hammer, like a bull in a china shop, to smash away any POSSIBILITY of their engineered slaves forming community, viewing one another as allies, social function, language, some areas of memory etc. the zeta generation sirenians were supposed to be workers who would never organise, never wish for more, and were cheaper than robots to maintain (self-sustaining!!!)

it's this specific goal of the genetic engineers that caused the uprising in the first settlement on Siren; when Ishmael et al learned what the engineers were doing, and realised that it would be morally unconscionable to allow it to occur. they made the choice - FOR the zeta, who were not given any representation in this rebellion - that the genetic code could never make it off the planet, to be used elsewhere. and that meant a (ultimately failed) attempt to hunt the first generations of zeta to extinction.

in any case the zeta population had to live with these effects and re-develop social functioning, p.much from scratch. this is why they're the only sirenian group i generalise in my posts; they were insular, apart from everyone else, and had very little input from other populations for almost the entirety of siren's history. when redeveloping their social functioning, they developed the early form of kattakati to kind of... reverse-engineer family groups. if you are engineered to be hyper individualistic, the world is not "us" but "me vs everything else". but community is good for survival. if you expand "me" to include other people, who are also "me", then they can perform this sleight of hand that enfolds others into your individualistic sense of Me Vs The World. the first kattakati were comprised of many bodies, forming large, complex structures, and in these I/Me/We/Us ceased to have independent meaning.

over time the broken social function became functional, but not repaired or regenerated or whatever, they still experience a different internal state than most other sirenians, but it works, and they don't need to encompass ALL of their community into their 'Me' in order to care for them or cooperate with them. i touched on it in this post but friendships require some care and effort to maintain still, and there can be an element of play-acting kattakati with others as a way to teach oneself how to form other bonds, like training wheels. but the concept of kattakati has become largely ritualised rather than strictly functional, this is where all the stuff about balance and various taboos come from. most zeta don't participate and they do fine Living In A Society.

so to answer your actual questions:

what does it feel like to claim something out of your control as a part of yourself? - so is your digestive system, your hair colour, your health. it requires trust, of course, but you aren't supposed to want to control all aspects of yourself. attaining this state of balance between red and blue within a single kattakati involves accepting a loss of control.

or to loosen up your grip on "identity" enough to allow an independent entity to fit within it without contradiction? - i feel this way about marriage, which is, intrinsically, kind of a horrifying concept! but you have to trust. contradiction is natural (if two bodies of a kattakati agree on everything all the time, it's actually deemed suspicious! they're trying too hard to make it fit, and therefore aren't compatible). now to be able to loosen that grip, first you need to have been raised in a culture where developing that grip does not feature. although they were made to be hyper-individualistic, what actually resulted was almost a hive mind in the strictest sense, not the pop-science imagining of it. that 'Me', when encompassing so many people, can very easily become a completely interchangeable, functionally identical Us/Me. but if you are one of the many zeta raised somewhere else, with a mixed community of zeta and others, you might hang onto a concept of identity that could make forming a kattakati bond an uncomfortable idea. some still do it, others reject it entirely. most kattakati feel pretty neutral about it though... it's just how they are.

do they perceive each other as independent, even? or is it a given that a part of yourself will retain autonomy and it just doesn't bother them much? - it's the second thing. it shouldn't bother you (within reason). sometimes the component bodies will workshop what kind of person they are - are they patient, aggressive, argumentative, kind, easygoing? it's possible for a kattakati's personality to be different to what the component bodies' would be if they were unbonded.

[call-me-casual]

Part one of what will be a series of posts about my ideas for a Thunderbirds are Go rewrite. I’m hoping this makes sense, series/season specific summaries will come as I come up with them.

Thunderbirds Are Go is the best animated show (and probably best show) I’ve ever seen, so this is a “fixing” rewrite and more “how would I take the story elements in a slightly different direction?” rewrite:

The first thing (and arguably most important) is that in this universe, the Zero-X was a conspiracy to kill Jeff Tracy. Yes, like that post I made a few months back. The GDF, for whatever reason, wanted Jeff dead and so left the Zero-X vulnerable to being stolen by The Hood. This conspiracy carries most of the show’s plot line from around part way into series two all the way to the end. The story is told through small moments across episodes, with the occasional one being specifically for it. Thunderbirds is an “adventure of the week show” after all.

Another big change is the inclusion of WASP and Spectrum. They wouldn’t be identical to their own respective canons (I don’t think TAG has any underwater peoples and no Zero-X to go to mars means no Mysteron war), but instead specialised branches of the GDF that were eventually separated to function independently. Both commanders, Shore and White, were close friends of the Tracy Family, but have become estranged following the supposed death of Jeff Tracy.

The Tracy family don’t really change at all. I don’t see anything I would change. But of course, they’ll have to face new challenges; getting the respect they deserve from other organisations (will they accept such young boys being on their level?), coming to terms with the loss of their father, and eventually having to question who they can even trust in this world once the conspiracy is revealed. Each brother has their moment and struggles.

For Alan, it’s the fight to prove himself, maybe not to his brothers, but to himself. To earn the respect of those they save and be seen as something other than a kid. All while dealing with the fact that his memories of their dad are fading, remembered only through pictures and the stories of others.

For Gordon, it’s the guilt of almost-betrayal, even if others see it differently, and learning you shouldn’t always meet your heroes. Not when they could lie to you.

For John, it’s living with the truth, trying to decide how to tell his family what he’s learnt in the whirlwind that is their lives. To find answers.

For Virgil, it’s the fight to keep his family safe. How long can he protect those he loves peacefully? As the world seems to have a taste for more Tracy blood, where should he draw the line?

For Scott, it’s the fight to continue his father’s legacy and keep International Rescue’s promise to humanity, to earn the respect of the old guard who still see a little boy and not a man, and when the truth comes out… the fight for justice.

[palestinegenocide]

More than 300 Palestinian sports teams are calling to ban Israel from the Olympics over its genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

The Israeli offensive on Gaza has claimed the lives of 26,706 civilians, including 11,422 infants and children. Ninety percent of Palestinians are internally displaced and living in inhumane conditions with “no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel.” No functional hospitals. No mosques. No churches. No libraries. No schools. No universities. No bakeries. At this rate, the brutal Israeli regime will soon destroy every aspect of life in Gaza, including its sports.

Join the global campaign to peacefully disrupt the road to Paris 2024 calling on the IOC to #BanIsrael until it ends its crimes against Palestinians and recognizes our UN-stipulated rights.

Register your group to join the campaign

We thus urgently demand:

An immediate suspension of Israel from participation in all international sports until it fully complies with international law and sports regulations

For global and European sports governing bodies to immediately uphold their statutory obligations – especially their own rules on human rights and non-discrimination given Russian, South African and other precedents. This would include, inter alia, a ban on Israel competing at the 2024 Paris Olympics, FIFA World Cup, and UEFA’s EURO. 

For a deeper analysis on the rationale to suspend Israel from international sports, please review this paper (also available in Spanish) that will be sent to sports organisations.

Here’s what you can do.

1. Join the Global Day(s) of Action, March 15-17 

Ahead of the IOC executive board meeting in Lausanne Switzerland (March 19-21), take the call from Palestinian teams to your National Olympic Committee, International Sports Federations and Recognized Sports Federations. Organize protests, sit-ins, peaceful disruptions, or awareness raising events on Israeli attacks on Palestinian sports. Register your group for more information.

2. Olympics qualifiers and events

From now until the Olympic Games start in July, the road to Paris will be filled with opportunities to remind the IOC that there is no place in the Olympics for genocide perpetrators. Earlier this month, four runners took the #CeasefireNow message to the Olympic Trials Marathon in Florida, crossing the finish line with Palestinian flags. Find information on Olympic time trials and qualifiers (also here) or other Olympics-related events in your area. Register your group for more information.

3. Kick Israeli apartheid out of sports

Is your country a signatory to the International Convention Against Apartheid in Sports? If so, it has an obligation to “take all appropriate action to secure the expulsion of a country practising apartheid from international and regional sports bodies.” Register your group to learn what you can do.

4. Sign the petition to ban Israel from world sports

Join more than 70,000 people from all over the world who have signed the petition calling for banning Israel from international sport.

Add your signature here

Israel has killed Palestinian Olympic Football coach Hani Al Masdar, destroyed the Palestinian Olympic Committee offices, and turned sports facilities into shameful mass detention and torture centers.

We can’t sit back as the IOC allows Israel to use the Olympics to sportswash its genocide in Gaza and its apartheid regime against Palestinians everywhere. Support the call from Palestinian teams. 

Join the campaign to #BanIsrael from the Olympics and peacefully disrupt the road to the Paris 2024 games. 

[hollowed-theory-hall]

The Term Warlock

I mentioned in the past I believe the term has to do with a profession in legislation/law-making (i.e Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot or my more headcanoned existence of Law Warlocks) but I read through Tales of Beedle the Bard recently and the author's note described the term as follows:

[The term “warlock” is a very old one. Although it is sometimes used as interchangeable with “wizard”, it originally denoted one learned in duelling and all martial magic. It was also given as a title to wizards who had performed feats of bravery, rather as Muggles were sometimes knighted for acts of valour. By calling the young wizard in this story a warlock, Beedle indicates that he has already been recognised as especially skillful at offensive magic. These days wizards use “warlock” in one of two ways: to describe a wizard of unusually fierce appearance, or as a title denoting particular skill or achievement. Thus, Dumbledore himself was Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot. JKR]

(Tales of Beedle the Bard, Albus Dumbledore on “The Warlock’s Hairy Heart”)

That being said, JKR's comments such as those often contradict or aren't 100% accurate to how certain terms are used in the books (like the fashion on Pottermore article she wrote). So I copied down every way in which the word 'Warlock' is used in the HP books to see what the term actually means:

As a title (in legal/political capacity):

ALBUS DUMBLEDORE (Order of Merlin, First Class, Grand Sore., Chf. Warlock, Supreme Mugwump, International Confed. of Wizards)

(PS)

They’ve demoted him from Chief Warlock on the Wizengamot — that’s the Wizard High Court — and they’re talking about taking away his Order of Merlin, First Class, too.

(GoF)

Here we see the aforementioned title of Chief Warlock (I didn't copy every time it was used in this context, since twice is enough). Contrary to JKR's note, the title of Chief Warlock has nothing to do with skill. It is a legal and political title. The Wizengamot is outright referred to as the Wizard High Court (it's also their parliament, btw, but more on that later). 'Cehif Warlock' is not a title denoting skill, but a title more akin to the Speaker of the House of Lords.

“But it’s against our laws,” said Ron. “Dragon breeding was outlawed by the Warlocks’ Convention of 1709, everyone knows that.

(PS)

Professor Binns, glancing up in the middle of a deadly dull lecture on the International Warlock Convention of 1289, looked amazed.

(CoS)

As I mentioned here, 'Warlock Convention' seems to be an alternate name for Wizengamot sessions. The Wizengamot predates the ministry (founded in 1707), and we know it functions as their parliament:

The Order of Merlin (sometimes abbreviated to O.M.) is awarded by the Wizengamot, an organisation that predates the Ministry of Magic and nowadays functions as a combination of court and parliament.

(Pottermore)

So the Wizengamot sessions where they act as a parliament and are devoted to law-making are just referred to as 'Warlock coinventions', as I theorized here. Since 'Warlock' is a term that seems to carry legal status since before the ministry. (Perhaps it is similar to muggle knights in a way like JKR said. Historically knights were part of the noble class. The nights were lords and relatives of lords, so Warlock being used in a similar way historically for a legal position makes more sense than just a skilled dueler. It also works well with the story after which this note appears. The Warlock in The Warlock's Hairy Heart lives in a castle, like a medieval lord).

We would also ask you to remember that any magical activity that risks notice by members of the non-magical community (Muggles) is a serious offense under section 13 of the International Confederation of Warlocks’ Statute of Secrecy.

(CoS)

This one is interesting since Percy is referring to the ICW (International Confederation of Wizards) as the International Confederation of Warlocks. This is interesting because you know Percy Weasley would use the most accurate term for the ICW, so my headcanon is that, as it is a political/legislative organization the 'W' in ICW stands for 'Warlocks' not 'Wizards' and most have just been saying it wrong for years and Percy is the correct one here.

This headcanon is somewhat supported by the Daily Prophet using 'Warlocks' instead of 'Wizards' too:

Fudge has been criticized by some members of the International Federation of Warlocks for informing the Muggle Prime Minister of the crisis.

(PoA)

(Though they do use 'Federation' instead of 'Confederation' becouse JKR isn't consistent)

Describe the circumstances that led to the Formation of the International Confederation of Wizards and explain why the warlocks of Liechtenstein refused to join.

(OotP)

The above quote also seems to use 'warlocks of Liechtenstein' to refer to a local governing body, since they were offered to join the ICW. This sounds like another Wizengamot-like council in Liechtenstein.

As a title (to signal a skilled wizard?)

Warlock D. J. Prod of Didsbury says: “My wife used to sneer at my feeble charms, but one month into your fabulous Kwikspell course and I succeeded in turning her into a yak! Thank you, Kwikspell!”

(CoS)

The above is from the pamphlet to Kwikspell in Filch's office and uses 'Warlock' the way you would use 'Professor' or 'Doctor' to give credibility to the claim, like saying "recommended by 9 of 10 doctors" on toothpaste.

So it's trying to sell Kwikspell as successful by the use of the term 'warlock' to denote D.J. Prod as a trustworthy wizard with experience. This could mean it's either referring to a skilled wizard (something I haven't seen anyone do in the books elsewhere) or that it's using it as a semi-noble/legal title as mentioned above.

Referring to wizards who are loud or wild-looking

The term 'warlock' is often used by Harry to refer to wizards who look wild or loud and rowdy, in contradiction to the other associations we just spoke of:

Harry ate breakfast each morning in the Leaky Cauldron, where he liked watching the other guests: funny little witches from the country, up for a day’s shopping; venerable-looking wizards arguing over the latest article in Transfiguration Today; wild-looking warlocks; raucous dwarfs; and once, what looked suspiciously like a hag, who ordered a plate of raw liver from behind a thick woolen balaclava.

(PoA)

I marked how the 'venerable' wizards are mentioned separately from the 'wild' warlocks.

It was extremely crowded, noisy, warm, and smoky. A curvy sort of woman with a pretty face was serving a bunch of rowdy warlocks up at the bar. “That’s Madam Rosmerta,” said Ron. “I’ll get the drinks, shall I?” he added, going slightly red.

(PoA)

A sweaty-faced witch in the center of the front row, who was fanning herself vigorously with a copy of the Daily Prophet, kept letting off a high-pitched whistle as steam came pouring out of her mouth, and a grubby-looking warlock in the corner clanged like a bell every time he moved, and with each clang his head vibrated horribly, so that he had to seize himself by the ears and hold it steady.

(OotP)

Staggering under the weight of as many books as he could carry, Harry returned to the Gryffindor common room, pulled a table into a corner, and continued to search. There was nothing in Madcap Magic for Wacky Warlocks . . . nothing in A Guide to Medieval Sorcery . . . not one mention of underwater exploits in An Anthology of Eighteenth-Century Charms

(GoF)

In the above quote, there is a book that uses 'wacky warlocks' in the title. Again, using warlock for a more wild wizard.

I find it super interesting that 'warlock' is either a refined, law-maker or a wild, rowdy wizard. It's possible Harry (and the book) are referring to warlocks from one of the other definitions (specifically the next category) and the wildness of them is just an additional fact mentioned about them.

Referring to an old wizard

The other group often referred to as 'warlocks' are very old wizards who look old:

“My dear boy,” said Lockhart, straightening up and frowning at Harry. “Do use your common sense. My books wouldn’t have sold half as well if people didn’t think I’d done all those things. No one wants to read about some ugly old Armenian warlock, even if he did save a village from werewolves. He’d look dreadful on the front cover. 

(CoS)

Seizing the chipped bust of an ugly old warlock from on top of a nearby crate, he stood it on top of the cupboard where the book was now hidden, perched a dusty old wig and a tarnished tiara on the statue’s head to make it more distinctive

(HBP)

Dad was going frantic — it’s only him and an old warlock called Perkins in the office — and they had to do Memory Charms and all sorts of stuff to cover it up — “But your dad — this car — ”

(CoS)

a haze of pipe smoke hung over several elderly warlocks deep in conversation, and a number of house-elves were negotiating their way squeakily through the forest of knees, obscured by the heavy silver platters of food they were bearing, so that they looked like little roving tables.

(HBP)

This kind of goes hand-in-hand with the refined skilled wizard who has a knight-like noble title 'warlock' is used for. Since you have the whole 'wise old wizard' concept it makes sense that 'warlock' is a term used to denote a wisen-looking old wizard.

The following quotes don't mention the 'warlocks' are old, but from the context and how we see 'warlock' used by Harry in his narration, I assume they're all just elderly wizards:

“Shh!” said Hermione desperately, looking around to make sure nobody was listening; there were a couple of warlocks sitting close by who were staring at Harry with great interest, and Zabini was lolling against a pillar not far away. “Harry, I’d be annoyed too, I know it’s your things he’s stealing — ”

(HBP)

“Ours do know a lot of excellent swear words,” said Ron, “but I think Fred and George taught them those.” He led a party of warlocks into the marquee as Luna rushed up.

(DH)

Krum glowered over the top of his drink, watching Xenophilius, who was chatting to several warlocks on the other side of the dance floor.

(DH)

The bar of the Leaky Cauldron was nearly deserted. Tom, the stooped and toothless landlord, was polishing glasses behind the bar counter; a couple of warlocks having a muttered conversation in the far corner glanced at Hermione and drew back into the shadows.

(DH)

It is possible the 'old' category is still using 'warlock' as a title and that these warlocks just happen to be old, but I doubt they would be marked in any way Harry would be able to tell on sight they have any legal position in the Wizaengamot just from looking at them. So, while it's a possibility, I find it unlikely.

Other

“It was a very near miss,” said Ernie. “And in case you’re getting ideas,” he added hastily, “I might tell you that you can trace my family back through nine generations of witches and warlocks and my blood’s as pure as anyone’s, so — ”

(CoS)

This is the only time 'warlock' is truly used as interchangeable with 'wizard' without denoting anything specific about said warlocks (old, skilled, legislator). That is, it is possible Ernie is trying to say many of his family were skilled and talented wizards since he is convincing Harry he is pureblood here. So it's possible he's using 'warlocks' in the context of politically important warlocks — as in claiming he's from a family of "lords". It's possible the Macmillans have a Wizengamot seat and Ernie is referring to many of his family being Wizengamot Warlocks and members of the Warlock's Convention.

Summary

The term Warlock is used for:

Wizards who hold legislative Wizengamot positions.

Historically it might've been used the way noble titles were used in the muggle world. (Knights were nobles and the Warlock from The Warlock's Hairy Heart lives in a castle).

An old wizard that looks elderly.

It might be used for (but it could be argued another meaning is meant in these references so it's open to interpretation):

A skilled wizard.

A loud, wild-looking wizard.

[dailyanarchistposts]

The collapse of workerism

Of course, some would have it that we never lost a revolutionary perspective at all, quite confident they had the solution all along. This comes in the form of workerism, a broad set of strategies – mainly Marxist or anarcho-syndicalist – that affirm the centrality of the working class for overthrowing capitalism. In the history of revolutionary struggle, few ideas have consistently held more sway; but surely that’s only the reason why this sorely outdated approach has proven so hard to get over. Things have changed more dramatically than ever in the last decades, shattering the material conditions that once granted workplace organisation such grandiose pretensions. It’s important to clarify why, or else the attempt to exceed activism risks being subsumed by yet another reformist method, this one all the more stagnant.

Only a few decades ago, the prospects of organised labour in the Global North were much more hopeful, with trade unions retaining a great deal of strength into the 1970s. Mainly during the ‘80s, however, capitalist production underwent some major alterations. Profound technological developments in the field of electronics – especially digitisation – caused the productive process to become much more automated, requiring significantly less human input. This combined with an increased ability on the part of employers to outsource employment to less economically developed countries, where labour was much cheaper. Fairly suddenly, therefore, the two biggest sectors of the economy – split mainly between industry and agriculture – were greatly reduced in size, resulting in massive layoffs. Yet those who lost their jobs were generally absorbed by steady growth in the services sector, thereby avoiding immediate social destabilisation. Whilst it was once the smallest economic sector by a long way, the services sector is now by far the largest in the Global North, even approaching 80% employment rates in the US, UK, and France.

The result has been a striking redefinition of the common notion of work. It’s lost its centre of gravity in the factory, having fragmented instead in the direction of various post-industrial workplaces – restaurants, shops, offices. Once a largely centralised mass, the working class has been dispersed across the social terrain, the new focus being on small, highly diverse productive units. Between these units, workers possess few common interests and interact little, leading to a significantly diminished potential for collective action. Of course, resistance in the workplace continues, but the internal avenues necessary for revolt to generalise have been majorly severed, the situation continuing to decline in light of ever greater technological advance.

Nobody can deny the profound identity crisis faced by the working class. Only a few decades ago, the factory was seen as the centre of everything, with workers offering the vital component in the functioning of society as a whole. Work was once a way of life, not so much in terms of the amount of time it took up, but instead because of the clear sense of existential grounding it offered. For generations, there had been a strong link between work and professionalism, with most workers committing to a single craft for the entirety of their lives. Career paths were passed down from father to son, who often remained in the same company; the families of different workers also maintained close ties with one another. Nowadays, however, everything has changed: employment is immensely uncertain, the relentless fluidity of the post-industrial economy forcing most to get by on a roster of precarious, low-skilled jobs. Far fewer people take pride in their work, especially given that employment only rarely has a convincing subtext of doing something socially important. Trade unions have also vanished as a historical force, having been defeated in the key battles of the ‘80s, their membership levels imploding in lock-step with the advance of neoliberalism. A residue of the old world still exists, but it continues to dissipate further every day, never to return. In the Global South, too, things are inevitably moving in the same direction.

These developments cast serious doubt on the validity of Marxist and anarcho-syndicalist strategies for revolution. It’s becoming increasingly meaningless to speak of “the workers” in reference to a cohesive entity. It isn’t as if the disintegration of the working class implies the absence of poverty, nor of the excluded – in no sense whatsoever. What it does mean is the end of the working class as a subject. One that was, as Marx put it, “disciplined, united, organised by the very mechanism of the process of capitalist production itself” (Capital, 1867). Over the last decades, the working class has been dismembered and demoralised by the very same mechanism: just as the mass application of steam and machinery into the productive process created the industrial proletariat two centuries ago, the invention of new, automated technologies has led to its dissolution. There’s no single project around which to unite the working class any more; it follows, as with identity politics, that gains in the workplace will almost always be limited to improving capitalism rather than destroying it. The Industrial Revolution has been superseded by the Digital Revolution, yet the revolutionary optimism of workerism remains ideologically trapped in a bygone era, fumbling for relevance in a century that won’t have it. Although, to be honest, this is hardly news: already for some time now, the nostalgic language of workerism has come across as stale and outdated to most, even if academics often struggle to keep up.

In any case, the collapse of workerism might be nothing to mourn. Another implication of the end of traditional employment is the predominance of a range of workplaces few would want to appropriate anyway. The factory has been replaced by the likes of call centres, supermarkets, service stations, fast food joints, and coffee shop chains. Yet surely no one can imagine themselves maintaining these workplaces after the revolution, as if anything resembling a collectively run Starbucks or factory farm is what we’re going for? When workerism first became popular, there was an obvious applicability of most work to the prospect of a free society. In the 21st century, however, the alienation of labour runs all the deeper: no longer is it the mere fact of lacking control over work, but instead its inherent function that’s usually the problem. To put it another way, it should come as no surprise that Marxists haven’t yet replaced their hammer and sickle with an office desk and espresso machine, as would be necessary to keep up with the times. The modern symbols of work are worthy only of scorn, not the kind of valorisation involved in putting them on a flag.

This is another big problem for the workerist theory of revolution, given its conception of revolution primarily or even exclusively in terms of the seizure of the means of production. Achieving reforms in the workplace is one thing, but only rarely can such exercises in confidence-building be taken as steps towards appropriating the workplace altogether. Surely the point isn’t to democratise the economy, but instead to pick it apart: those aspects of the economy genuinely worth collectivising, as opposed to converting or simply burning, are few and far between. Of course, they still exist, but they’re marginal. And that confirms the absurdity of expecting workplace organisation to offer the centrepiece of any future revolution.

This hardly implies doing away with the material aspects of revolutionary struggle, given that communising the conditions of existence remains necessary for living our lives – not just this or that activist campaign – in genuine conflict with the system. All the more, the moment in which these subterranean influences suddenly erupt, and mass communisation overturns the ordinary functioning of the capitalist machine, surely remains a defining feature of revolution itself. Yet such endeavours must be sharply distinguished from seizing the means of production – that is, appropriating the capitalist infrastructure more or less as it stands before us. Far from offering a vision of the world we want to see, the syndicalist proposal to reclaim the conditions of work – to assume control of very the system that’s destroying us – merely implies self-managing not only our own exploitation, but also that of the planet.

As an aside, it should be added that these issues undermine the contemporary relevance of Marxism altogether. It was previously suggested that Marxian class analysis no longer offers a credible account of oppression; the current discussion, meanwhile, suggests it cannot be used to frame the topic of revolution either. As a method for interpreting the world, as well as for changing it, Marxism has had its day. If we wanted to be a little diplomatic, we could say this isn’t so much a criticism of the theory itself, more a recognition of the fact that the world it was designed to engage with no longer exists. If we wanted to be a little less diplomatic, moreover, it should be added that what’s left of Marxism is utterly boring, reformist, and kept “alive” almost exclusively by academics. As the big guy declared back in 1852, “The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.” Yet in no case has this claim, offered in response to the lack of imagination amongst revolutionaries in the 19th century, been more relevant than with Marxism today. We should pay our respects, if indeed any respect is due, whilst refusing to be crippled by an outdated approach. The same goes for anarcho-syndicalism, its once unbridled potential decisively shut down by the combined victories of fascism and Bolshevism.

To offer a last word of clarification, none of this implies doing away with workplace organisation altogether. There’s still much to be said for confronting power on every front: the collectivisation of any remaining useful workplaces, as well as the fierce application of the general strike, surely remains vital for any effective revolutionary mosaic. Just as workplace organisation continues to prove effective for breaking down social barriers, as well as potentially improving our lives in the here and now. The core claim offered here is only that it cannot be considered the centrepiece of revolutionary struggle altogether – quite the minimal conclusion. Merely in terms of asking what the abolition of class might look like today, workerism has lost its way. And that doesn’t begin to consider the abolition of hierarchy as such. When taken in isolation, organised labour offers nothing more than a subtle variety of reformism, thinly cloaked in its stuffy revolutionary pretensions. Total liberation, by contrast, refuses to single out any focal points of the clash, be they workerist, activist, or otherwise.

[gumnut-logic]

Happy new year

With the new year passing here in under an hour, I would like to wish all and Thunderfam a fantastic new year full of fun and creativity. May 2025 be a good one for everyone.

Also, what would this blog be without a nuttyfic reblog :D

Ten...the match caught and flickered in the breeze. She caught it, wrapping it with her hands, nursing it to the candle, and letting out a breath as flared into life.

Module Four hit the surface of the North Pacific Ocean and immediately started rolling in the swell. Thunderbird Two’s heavy-duty spotlights tracked it as it was tossed about.

“Gordon, you okay?”

“Riding it out. Though I have to say, I’m glad I didn’t over indulge at dinner.” Virgil watched as all the module indicators flicked to green. “We are go for module deployment.”

“Make it fast. That swell is unpredictable.” He would have preferred to have lowered TB4 using the grapples, but the wind gusts were more problematic than the swell. As if to reassure him of his decision, TB2 was suddenly swiped sideways. He compensated hurriedly, bringing her back to stability, her lights once again training on the module. It was the better of two poor choices.

The undersea habitat didn’t have a choice, so here they were, in the pitch dark of the last hour of the year, attempting to fish more scientists out of the deep.

The weather was not cooperating.

Gordon lowered the ramp, and with a speed he would not usually deploy, shot off into the cold and turbulent water.

Virgil grunted as the wind caught his girl again.

Module retrieval was going to be a bitch.

-o-o-o-

Nine...she took the first candle from its holder and gently tilted it towards its brother. The two wicks touched and flickered. The two became one.

Space is silent, but it isn’t. There is always some kind of machinery functioning to keep life alive. Whether it be Thunderbird Three herself, or his own helmet, Alan was always accompanied by sound.

At this very moment, it was his own swearing.

“Goddamnit, move!”

But the airlock refused to obey. Likely fused shut by the explosion that had set the ship adrift, it was between him and the three remaining life signs. He had to get it open, their life support was failing.

“John, what are the chances of me cutting through this?”

“Not great. It is reinforced. Have you tried the Claw?”

The Claw, complete with a capital C, was a piece of equipment designed by Virgil based on his exo-suit. Virgil rarely made it out into space, but there was occasionally the need for heavy lifting out in the void. It used a grip attached to a thruster pack and could be deployed to create force in any direction.

“It was next on my list.”

“You’ve got nine minutes left.”

“Working on it.” He pulled in his equipment pack, tethered to his sled, and grabbed the Claw. Fastening the grip onto the airlock wheel, he deployed the thruster pack to give the correct directional push.

And the wheel refused to budge.

-o-o-o-

Eight...the first candle flickered haphazardly, once again teased by the breeze as she moved it to the second of its brethren. She smiled just slightly as it, too, caught and flared.

“How do they expect me to catch something I can’t see?!”

It was muttered at his instruments and he didn’t expect an answer. All his scanning equipment was trained ahead attempting to locate the hidden exhaust of an experimental plane deployed by the GDF. It would have been an interesting experiment, if the pilot wasn’t currently trapped inside. It was codenamed Nighthawk because the plane was designed to work best at night - apparently testing it during the day would have made Scott’s rescue attempt a little too easy. So here he was after dark, on New Year’s Eve of all nights, flying over the back end of New South Wales attempting to find an invisible plane.

Yet again, International Rescue was the only organisation with the mechanical guts to fix the GDF’s problems.

It pissed him off big time.

His sensors flickered, his arms moved, and Thunderbird One darted to starboard. For just a moment he had the craft clear as day in his sights.

Then it was gone again.

It was only a matter of time before it crashed. He could communicate with the pilot, but the signals were scrambled and misdirected and no use for locating anything. When the GDF screwed up, they screwed up big time.

“C’mon, c’mon!” He brought TB1 to a hover, every sensor combing the darkness around him.

A flicker.

Another.

Nothing.

A godawful metallic screech as something impacted his ‘bird’s hull on the port side. She swung around, spun on her axis, and suddenly Scott was in free fall.

-o-o-o-

Seven...the third candle wouldn’t catch. She bit her lip, and prayed just a little. The breeze threatened.

John Tracy wished he had more hands. Two were not enough when he had four brothers - one in space, one underwater, and two in the air.

“Scott! You need altitude! Impact in twenty seconds.”

His brother grunted as his hologram grimaced, fighting the controls of his ‘bird.

John didn’t need a damage report, TB5 provided him with all too much detail. Damage to Thunderbird One’s port side VTOL and flight stabiliser had her in a spin.

“She’s not responding.”

“You’ve got additional weight on your port side.” John’s fingers flew across the hologram, attempting to ascertain exactly what the readings were trying to tell him. Damn. “You have a mass embedded in her superstructure, despite the fact we can’t see it.” Calculations. “You’re going to have to attempt to land vertically. Use your rear thrusters to support the imbalance.”

It wasn’t going to be easy. Thunderbird One wasn’t designed to be anywhere vertical but on her gantry, but there was no way Scott would be able to sustain a horizontal landing.

“FAB, Thunderbird Five.” It was said through gritted teeth.

He couldn’t help but think that if Thunderbird Two had been sharing the same airspace as her sister, she could have pulled her out of her dive.

But she wasn’t.

And John was left to watch.

-o-o-o-

Six...the third wick absolutely refused to light and her heart clenched. Let it rest a moment. She moved onto the fourth candle and touched the flame to the waxed cotton.

Night rescues weren’t really out of the ordinary, but they could be eerie. As he left the reach of Thunderbird Two’s powerful spots, he had to rely on the illumination his own Thunderbird could emit. And Thunderbird Four could shine a considerable wattage.

Underwater nightlife was a whole different ocean full of fish in comparison to that under daylight. Despite being in the middle of open ocean, this particular spot was above the very top of a great undersea mountain, just high enough to support the beginnings of a temperate reef system. No doubt one of the reasons the mobile observatory was in the area.

“Undersea Habitat Victor-Two-Zero-Romeo, this is Thunderbird Four, do you read me?”

The line crackled a moment, but a female voice gasped and answered. “Oh, thank god. We are down to our last module. Please hurry.”

“FAB, ma’am. I’m on approach. Can you give me any further detail on the cause of the problem?”

“It won’t go away and keeps attacking.”

Gordon frowned. “What won’t go away?”

“The whale.”

“A whale?!” And his spots lit up the damaged habitat. It looked as if it had been pummelled with a giant baseball bat. Of the five interconnected modules, only one had any sign of life. “Why would a whale attack you?”

But he didn’t get a chance to listen to her answer as his spots lit up a giant mass of flesh, an eyeball, and suddenly Thunderbird Four was rolling.

-o-o-o-

Five...when the fourth candle refused to light, she took firmer measures and turned to the iron fire pot and touched the first candle to paper. It burst into flame.

“Alan, you’ve got incoming debris!”

“What?!”

But John didn’t need to repeat himself as the first of the projectiles tore through the space in front of his helmet and ricocheted off the hull of the space freighter, narrowly missing his arm.

“Shit!”

“Take cover. Freighter’s starboard side. Now.”

Alan grabbed the Claw and flipped himself vertically to thrust in the right direction and tore around the engine compartment of the ship and hid in a crevice directly opposite the incoming stream. “Where the hell did that come from?”

“Apologies, Alan, I didn’t catch it early enough.”

Alan sighed. He knew his brother was stretched thin at the moment. Apparently dangerously thin. He should have been paying more attention himself.

“We’re down to five minutes.”

“I know.” Silent impacts thundered around him. “Is there any other way in that doesn’t require me to be swiss cheesed?”

“Only the maintenance hatch you dismissed earlier.”

“We may not have a choice.” Alan sighed. “I’ll see what I can do, but it is going to be tight. It wasn’t meant for ship access.” But he would make it work.

Grabbing the Claw and his laser cutter, Alan darted out from his crevice and along the length of the ship, hiding in its shadow. A snap of a carabiner and he was secured once again.

“Okay, you hunk of junk, I’m going to kick your ass.”

-o-o-o-

Four...The breeze was stronger and the first candle flickered out, leaving just the one burning, flickering sporadically. She added fuel to the fire pot.

The flash was blinding and Virgil swore.

Lightning wasn’t a problem, but the storm was. “Gordon, you need to make this quick, the weather is deteriorating faster than we anticipated. He swore again as a nasty downdraft attempted to shove the cargo plane into the turbulent ocean.

The module below was being thrown about like a cork. Virgil made the decision. “Thunderbird Four, I am submerging the module. You will need to dock underwater.” His fingers darted across controls as Thunderbird Two shuddered through another nasty downdraft. Below, the mechanics of Module Four started pumping water and it slipped beneath the waves to hover at a depth that would protect it from the turbulence.

“FAB, Virgil - Shit!”

“Gordon?”

“We have a pissed off whale down here!”

Virgil watched as his readouts tracked Thunderbird Four. She was darting, rolling and suddenly shoved sideways by massive lifesign. He grit his teeth, unable to do anything to help.

-o-o-o-

Three…she built up the fire pot until it was a massive towering flame.

Scott yanked the lever backwards and let off a prayer to the god of pilots.

Thunderbird One attempted to respond, and he grit his teeth. “C’mon.” Without her port thruster, getting her vertical was a challenge. “C’mon, damnit.” The extra weight dragged and she refused to stabilise.

The air was dark around him, but his instruments were screaming altitude loss and collision warnings, his cockpit lit up like a Christmas tree.

“Goddamnit, fly!”

-

Gordon swooped around the mass of angry whale. What the hell was his problem. And it was definitely a ‘he’, a full-on bull sperm whale, a very unhappy one.

He ran through whale behaviours in his head as he swooped and dove towards the habitat. A hand darted across his instruments, searching...

-

Alan hit the hatch with his fist in frustration. Grip, for crying out loud!

He was down to three minutes to get these guys out and he still hadn’t made it into the damn ship yet.

There was no sound in space, other than the scream in his own helmet as suddenly the entire side of the ship was torn away, a chunk of rock tearing through its hull.

The Claw spun off into space.

-

John bit through his lip, his concentration total on all four brothers. One hand played his holographic controls like Virgil played his piano, data shunted off to where it was desperately needed at the flick of a finger. The other spun between views, scans and acquired information at the full speed his highly advanced Thunderbird could manage.

“Virgil! Waterspout!” And the information was shunted directly to TB2.

-

“Waterspout?! What the hell!” Thunderbird Two groaned as he forced her sideways out of the path of the anomaly. The crosswinds were shit, and she dipped noseward. Damnit!

He kicked in her rear thrusters, killed the VTOL and tore across the ocean in an arc, circling around to return for pickup. She bucked like a rebellious mare.

-o-o-o-

Two...she grabbed all five doused candles in one fist.

Gordon swore again as the whale clipped him on one side. “Okay, I’ve had enough of this. Undersea Habitat Victor-Two-Zero-Romeo, I want you to kill all transmissions. All kinds. I want you silent as the grave.”

“What?”

He spun TB4 on her axis. “Now. If I think what is happening is happening this is your own fault, do what I say!”

He sighed as all transmission bands went silent. He scanned the full spectrum. No....no...ah, damn there it was. “I said all of them!” And it finally disappeared.

Another dodge of a whale fluke and Gordon peeled off in a curve.

-

Alan tasted blood. He had bitten clean through his cheek. He spun slowly in space, the ship in front of him sporting a jagged hole in its side.

Just big enough for an astronaut to crawl through.

Two minutes and counting...

-

Thunderbird One bucked like a mule, but he finally managed to get her vertical enough to fire her rear thrusters. Their plummet slowed.

The holographic ground was still coming up fast.

-

Virgil homed in on the module’s signal, finding once again his place in space. Lightning flashed in warning.

-

John held his breath. Seconds ticked by...

-o-o-o-

One...with determination she thrust all five wicks into the roaring flame of the fire pot. Burn damn you.

Scott yelled as his thrusters made contact with solid ground.

Gordon flicked a control and Thunderbird Four sung into the darkness.

Alan dove into the ship, calling out in desperation.

Virgil swore yet again as Thunderbird Two bucked.

John wished he could close his eyes.

-o-o-o-

All five candles burst into vibrant flame, the five merging into one, defying the breeze, taking on the energy of the fire pot and burning strongly.

Just as midnight passed over Tracy Island, Sally Tracy separated out the five candles and placed each of them in their holders. She smiled just slightly as each eagerly leapt up brightly, dancing.

“Grandma? Have you heard anything from John?” Kayo walked across the comms room towards the balcony where Sally had set up the fire pot. The breeze tousled her hair as it lay loose around her shoulders.

“Not in the last ten minutes.”

Kayo came up close and hugged her. “Happy New Year, Grandma.”

She kissed her granddaughter on her cheek. “Happy New Year, honey.”

-o-o-o-

Epilogue

As dawn lit up the sky on Tracy Island, the sun was witness to five very tired brothers flying home. Thunderbird Two had Thunderbird One grasped under her undercarriage, the severely damaged craft sporting a massive dent in her port side. Her pilot sat very unhappily beside Virgil in the cockpit of TB2. Gordon was asleep in the seat behind them.

The sky roared as the great red rocket of Thunderbird Three tore out of re-entry and spun in for landing.

She was followed by the ever-silent drop of the elevator from Thunderbird Five.

Virgil lowered his brother’s ‘bird to the side of TB2’s runway. He and Brains, and no doubt Scott, would be out later to assess the damage and plan repairs. As fast as possible. Scott was intolerable when his ‘bird was down.

He rolled his shoulders as he brought his own ‘bird into land. There would be no shortage of checks to be done on Thunderbird Two, either. Gordon was already complaining about the work to be done on both TB4 and Module Four, and he wasn’t even fully awake.

Thunderbird Two spun in her hanger and he powered her down.

All three brothers sighed.

“Debrief in ten?”

Scott muttered an affirmative and while Virgil ran through post flight, his brothers crawled out of their seats and headed up to the villa.

In the distance, Thunderbird Three roared as she docked in her hanger.

-o-o-o-

“The idiots were emitting random noise on a frequency that could have been designed to piss off a sperm whale. Once I had them kill it off, I dug up something that would interest, but keep that same whale calm, and I led him off. When he was gone, it was easy to grab the three idiots. We docked with the module, surfaced, and then had wonder pilot over here do his retrieval magic. I have to say, Virgil, that was some damn fine manoeuvring.”

Virgil blinked at the unexpected praise. Gordon must be seriously tired. “Thank you. I admit it wasn’t easy, but we made it in one piece. Brains, I will need to do some thorough checks on the grapple launchers and the module connectors, they were put under some serious strain.”

The engineer nodded.

Scott blinked as if he was having trouble keeping his eyes open. “Good job, Gordon, Virgil.” He turned to their youngest brother and frowned. Virgil followed his gaze and found Alan asleep in the corner of the couch.

“I can report for Alan.” John looked as tired as Virgil felt. “All the crew of the freighter were saved. In spite of the unexpected debris storm Alan encountered. Virgil, he will need a new Claw. He might have some modification requests on that front as well. “John yawned. “Sorry, full report will be available as soon as I’ve had enough sleep.”

“Scott, your turn.” And despite himself, Virgil yawned as well.

“I’ll keep it short. Stop doing that.” And Virgil grinned as Scott caught the yawn bug. “The GDF night camouflage is pretty damn good. I had a lot of trouble locating their craft. That problem was solved by said ship colliding with Thunderbird One’s port side. You’ve seen the damage. She’s down for repairs. We’ll know for how long as soon as Brains has a chance to assess it. Pilot was a lucky bastard and survived with only minor injuries. Apparently, the camouflage works both ways and navigation from inside the ship is extremely difficult. It’s back to the drawing board for the GDF.” And he spat the acronym. “Brains, you might want to check out One’s logs on what she could detect. All I can say is that Thunderbird Shadow walks all over them.” There was no shortage of smugness in that statement either.

Accompanied by another yawn.

“Well done everyone.”

They all muttered something congratulatory, punctuated by another round of yawns.

“Oh, and Happy New Year.”

A couple of grunts followed that.

“Get some sleep and we’ll look at throwing some belated fireworks.”

More grunting.

“Dismissed.”

Virgil stood up with creaking bones and stumbled towards the stairs.

And almost collided with his grandmother.

“Oh, so sorry, Grandma.” He steadied her with one hand, suddenly aware of four brothers lining up behind him. In the corner of his eye, Alan was wobbling with Gordon holding one of his arms to keep him steady.

Grandma grabbed him in a hug. “Happy New Year, Virgil.”

He startled and immediately returned the embrace, dropping his chin onto her head and holding her tight. “Happy New Year, Grandma.” He kissed her hair. His eyes darted to his brothers, all four frozen to the spot.

She let him go, but looked up at him and smiled, before darting to Scott and repeating the process.

Virgil frowned, staring just a little as she moved from one brother to another, wishing each of them a Happy New Year and hugging intensely.

His attention was suddenly drawn away, however, as, silent as always, Kayo appeared and wrapped her arms around him. “Happy New Year, Virgil.”

His eyes widened, but he hugged her and wished her the same. She smiled up at him and then, just like Grandma, moved onto Scott and, hugging him, wished him a Happy New Year.

Virgil simply stared.

Once all the brother hugging had been completed, both women stood back and Grandma started ushering them up the stairs. “Well, off to bed with you. We can celebrate later tonight.” She smiled at all of them.

Kayo’s smile was a little smaller, but just as genuine.

Virgil decided he was too tired to work out what the hell was going on. He turned and began to tackle the stairs. He would think after he had slept.

-o-o-o-

Sally watched her boys climb the stairs wearily.

They were home safe. Tired, but safe.

So far it had been a good year.

-o-o-o-

[kailash-se-birha]

Just saw this on twitter:

Its somewhat of an old news but still very relevant.

An excerpt from, Gold monetisation: An ingenious way of looting temple jewels by the DMK government by The Organiser:

"Gold ornaments offered by the devotees to nine major temples, including Palani Dhandayuthapani Swamy temple, Meenakshi Sundareswarar temple in Madurai, Subrahmanya Swamy temple in Tiruchendur and and Mariamman temple in Samayapuram, were converted into gold bars. The department has deposited gold bars weighing over 497 kg so far.

The temple properties, both movable and immovable, antique jewellery, and rare and invaluable idols, have been the targets of politicians, the international idol smuggling mafia and some corrupt HR and CE officials. Lakhs of acres of temple lands are being grabbed, alienated, and given to other religious people. Idols are being stolen and smuggled for a hefty sum. Rare and antique value ancient temple jewellery was reportedly replaced with duplicate ones. There is a strong cry to retrieve the temples from the government control and leave it to function independently like the Waqf board and Christian churches. But both the DMK and AIADMK are not in favour of it for reasons better known to them."

Hindus can't even control their temples which served as the central institutions of culture providing food, education, medical facilities, promoted cultural art forms, etc. And the same temples are being looted by these political crooks and cronies, but sure hindus are the "oppressors", ps: I despise this oppressor/oppressed dichotomy. Meanwhile this country has a supra judicial organisations, or board, usurping land left right and centre from literally everyone for the benefit of one religious community. And finally, now the government is attempting to do something about it, we have the leaders of that community making calls for street violence, international lunatic preacher intervening in Indian politics and the leader of a literal Islamic Republic comparing India to a nation rife with civil war and an active war zone. A true Banana Republic to its core.

[ophthalmotropy]

what's happening in argentina?

I don't fault you for the broad question because I'd ask too, but I need you to know that as a non-smoker I've never felt so strongly the need for a cigarette as I did just now thinking about answering this question. But I'll do my best.

In November of last year, the country elected Javier Milei as president. He would swear into office the next month. Javier Milei is a self-identified anarcho-capitalist and libertarian, although he states he is a minarchist in the short term (meaning he thinks the only functions the State should serve are those of law enforcement: no public education, social development, market regulations, etc etc). Some of his most controversial campaign statements included projects to legalise the free and unregulated sale of organs, and, along with his vice-president Victoria Villarruel (who in her youth organised visits to Jorge Rafael Videla in prison), apologia for the 1976 military dictatorship by revindicating the theory of the two demons (fair warning that from what I skimmed that article is biased in favour of the theory) and casting into doubt the estimated 30.000 victims of state terrorism (torture, disappearance followed by death) (also warning that that article uses the name the military junta gave this process) during its duration.

Since he took over six months ago, the population's purchasing power has dropped by 38%, plunging millions of people below the line of poverty. In stark contrast to this, Milei has been travelling around the world using public funds to visit his ultraright idols; most notably, Trump, who is not the political leader of any country at the moment (making his trip to see him a personal visit and not a diplomatic one, thus invalidating his arguments for using our money to go there).

On the subject of diplomacy, his government has been swinging quite a lot of bats at hornets' nests, accusing China and Brazil of communism and insulting the wife of the president of Spain. All of this is an international relations nightmare that will take endless apologies to undo.

Another interesting resolution deregulates the operations of foreign companies, SPVs, and offshore companies (article in Spanish), with the stated goal of attracting investments. Those types of companies have historically been used to conceal illicit activity, so resolutions in that vein pave the way to effectively turn Argentina into a fiscal paradise. This isn't the only problem they pose (offshore companies don't pay taxes, so there'd be a loss in the public sector, for example), but it is the most worrying to me because they also eliminated restrictions for Sociedades de Acciones Simplificadas (simplified stock companies), most of which have historically been used to commit crimes among which is the drug trade. Once you have narcos in your country, there's no taking it back--Argentina would be at real risk of ceasing to exist as we know it.

This administration is also slashing public spending, resulting in some universities suspending their activities temporarily. They also failed to deliver oncological medicine, depriving cancer patients of assistance the state is obligated to provide. As a result of this, several people have died already. In this climate of extreme poverty, soup kitchens have been shutting down en masse due to the withdrawal of state funding, and laws that protected tenants' rights and regulated rent prices have been severely modified to the detriment of the tenants.

The violent decrease in public spending also resulted in thousands of state workers being fired overnight. The attack is especially centred on state organisations that promote the arts or whose purpose is to fight discrimination. On this subject, 10% of the transgender and travesti workers who had their positions guaranteed by the law were fired illegally, and government members are outspoken about their opposition to this law--which isn't surprising. Diana Mondino, the current chancellor, has compared same-sex marriage to "the right to having lice" while she held a position in Congress. Ricardo Bussi, a current legislator, compared homosexuality to disability in October 2023. Coming to this year, Francisco Sánchez, the Secretary of Religion, said that the laws protecting the right to abortions, divorce, and same-sex marriage "seek to pervert our children and damage society". Milei is also on record describing abortion as "homicide aggravated by the bond".

Also recently, Milei's biographer, Nicolás Márquez, gave a one-hour interview in which he characterised homosexuality as a disease, claiming that when the State "promotes homosexuality" (as it allegedly did before Milei came to power), it is aiding a "self-destructive" conduct, supporting these claims with unfounded statistics about the correlation between STIs and homosexuality; he also denied the existence of homophobia and described lesbians and gays as being "against nature". For the sake of full disclosure, I will say he explicitly freed Milei and his government of responsibility for his declarations--but I think it's really important to point out the kind of people and rhetorics this government is giving a platform to; after all, nobody knew Nicolás Márquez before he started writing for Milei. In approximately the same time frame, and in response to a horrific hate crime that resulted in the death of three lesbians, Manuel Adorni, the presidential spokesman, said that he "doesn't like" to talk about a hate crime because men suffer violence too--and he said this in a press conference.

I'm probably forgetting something important--so much has happened in the past months--but I hope this is enough to give you an impression of the changes our society is undergoing. Please let me know if you have follow-up questions. <3

[eternal-echoes]

Ordinary Palestinians want to build a prosperous, functioning society. Hamas, in its obsession with annihilating Israel, doesn't care about that. It wishes only to bring about a genocidal Islamist dystopia. It is Hamas, after all, that holds Palestinians hostage in Gaza, setting up military installations in — and launching rockets from — civilian areas in the full knowledge that counterstrikes will kill innocent people. It is Hamas that impoverishes Palestinians by stealing humanitarian aid to fund its terror. This is what 'by any means necessary' truly signifies: supreme callousness towards Palestinian life. If you genuinely want to see peace between Israelis and Palestinians, or more generally between Muslims and Jews in the Middle East, then Hamas should be your enemy. And even if — like many in the West, as we can now see — you don't care at all about Israeli or Jewish lives, even if you care only about the lives of Palestinians, Hamas is still your enemy. After all, Hamas ruthlessly persecutes any Palestinians who disagree with it: a 2022 U.S. State Department report found that, among other abuses, Hamas detained and assaulted critical journalists. It is especially hostile to public figures associated with its rival Fatah, the Palestinian party voted out of office in Gaza in 2006, but which still runs the West Bank. Hamas harasses its own dissidents, and has invaded the home of at least one young critical activist, telling his parents to keep their son under control — or else. As a Dutch MP in 2004 and 2005, I travelled to the West Bank and met Palestinians. In public, they spouted all the usual lines about Israel being their 'oppressor'. But once the cameras were switched off, they spoke more truthfully. They complained bitterly about their treatment by Hamas and other radical groups, and told me how money meant to feed the people was being taken to fund those organisations' activities and their leaders' luxurious lifestyles. Arabs and Palestinians alike told me how fed up they were with conflict, and how ready they were for peace. Hamas, like other Islamist groups, has done its best over the course of decades to stomp all over those wishes. And it has been successful. The shocking rise in anti-Semitism in the West owes much to the entrenched Islamist networks that have spent years stirring up this ancient hatred. Europe must now wake up to these fifth columnists who shamelessly celebrate violence and bigotry, promoting hatred of the Jewish minority in Europe. The West must also wake up to the moral corruption of its own Hamas supporters, from Left-wing university students to flag-waving street thugs. Meanwhile, elite human-rights organisations need to do far more to name terrorism when they see it. It is horrifying to see Amnesty International claiming that one of the 'root causes' of the crisis is 'Israel's system of apartheid imposed on Palestinians'. Human Rights Watch, meanwhile, should do more than merely equivocating in its insistence that no injustice can justify another. This is not to argue that Israel should be immune from criticism. My point is that much of the criticism is at best misguided and at worst thinly veiled anti-Semitism. Hamas, like Lebanon's Hezbollah, Isis in Syria and Iraq, Nigeria's Boko Haram, Somalia's Al-Shabaab and several other groups, are fighting not for the liberty and prosperity of Muslims but, ultimately, for the annihilation of Israel and the imposition of an Islamic state. If Palestinians and other Muslims have to suffer for that aim, then so be it.

Full article

The emphasis are mine.

[marchwardenofmordor]

Ngl. I think Melkor’s a twat but in some regards I can deeply empathise.

One being that I absolutely DESPISE conformity. As a kid one of the first things my nursery school teachers complained to my father about was “He will not conform” (to which my dad was an absolute boss and said “he’s 4. I don’t want him to conform.”)

There is nothing I hate more than when an organisation (*cough*christianity*cough*) puts out a fucking order and people just follow it blindly, or have to keep up with the latest trends, or looks at what everyone else is doing/wearing/liking/siding with/thinking before deciding to just follow along with no creativity or input of their own whatsoever; like I’m not even being funny, it actually fills me with rage and makes me want to put people in a jar and shake it until they develop a sense of free will / the ability to cultivate their own ideas / learn how to think for themselves.

When I go out and see groups of people with the same haircut, wearing the SAME OUTFIT, and everyone looks THE SAME— if I had a fëa it would literally be writhing around and shrieking inside of me.

I can also empathise with his frustration at not being granted creative freedom - hence why I am self employed. I HATE being told what to do or how to think and (autistic) I have an extremely strong sense of autonomy. Give me a brief and I’ll create you something beautiful, but by the fucking gods do NOT try to tell me how to work my own craft. Tight restraints / trying to force me to create things I do not want to create are a sure fire way to piss me off. I refuse to be contained.

And to see someone like Mairon with BUCKETS of talent being tied down and restricted by an authority figure would 100% make me go “hey baby come here, it’s free real estate; lets go nuts and create wacky shit and directly oppose what society tries to force upon us”. I love rebels and punks, and one of my favourite aspects of a person is creativity combined with a good strong rebellious streak. If you’re a bit of a wild child chances are I’ll absolutely adore you. And if it’s hiding inside of you under layers of anxiety, I will make it my personal mission to empower you.

Grip life by the wheel and fuck what everyone else thinks; put your foot to the floor and leave them in the dust. You wanna mod your bod? Wanna wear crazy outfits and dress like a fairy? Wanna be a genderless amorphous gay presence that haunts the library? Wanna drink brandy, smoke cigars and not wear any knickers? Fucking- *smacking fists on the table* - GO FOR IT. 👹👹👹👹👹

But then on the other hand. I like order and routine. All of my shit is organised and everything has its place and I tend to get very upset if someone comes along and moves it. I use it as an anchor for my chaos. I hyperfixate, and woe betide anyone who tries to pull me away from a task I haven’t finished (not my proudest moment, but as a VERY young child if I was focused on a task, I’d sit there and piss myself and finish my task before listening to the needs of my body. Nowadays I hold it or put off eating / sleeping until the task is finished. Like let’s be for real: if my own bodily functions can’t pull me away from a task, another person hasn’t got a hope in hell.). When I am doing something, I am doing something.

Also envy of other people’s creativity is totally natural. It’s natural for creatives to be jealous of one another.

What makes me different from Melkor is that I wouldn’t let that envy lead me into destroying someone else’s work. Because I know the hard graft that goes into it. When protesters vandalise art it provokes the same level of rage in me as watching the Church rope more people into their ideologies.

And Melkor destroying the creative works of the other Valar is the main thing that made me go “wow, what a dick”. I was all for him and was internally just like “fuck yeah get it king, REFUSE CONTAINMENT!!” up until that point.

I completely understand frustrated curiosity.

[seankayos]

We've got two days until the second part of Arcane season 2 so I'm going to post a theory now to see if I'm right in 2 days, spoilers for Season 2 part 1 under the cut

I think Cait knows Ambessa framed Zaun for the memorial attack, or at least suspects it. It was pretty clear that she had something to do with it early on but the fact we get all the flashbacks to her organising it intercut with Caitlyn approaching her makes me think that's the moment Caitlyn internally tallies up who has been winning and losing this conflict and sees that Ambessa has just been stacking wins since the bombing and how everything is playing into her hands.

This isn't to excuse her going full authoritarian or anything, she crossed that line when she decided to use what is functionally a chemical weapon in a sealed urban environment to control civilians, but I think she took the mantle of commander to try and stay at least partially in control of a situation that has rapidly slipped through her fingers.

[scifigeneration]

Esa at 50: how the space agency helped keep Europe at the frontiers of science

by Martin Barstow, Professor of Astrophysics and Space Science at the University of Leicester

Everyone has heard of NASA, a name synonymous with every aspect of space exploration. Yet talk about Esa, the European Space Agency, is more likely to result in a blank stare.

Esa is not such a highly recognised brand, yet it has been central to the development of space exploration and to space science in Europe, delivering world class science at the frontiers of knowledge and allowing the continent to compete commercially with the wider world.

Europe compares favourably with the US on the level of space science it delivers, and Esa has sometimes “gone boldly” where even Nasa has not. Now that Esa has turned 50 years old, it’s a good time to look at the organisation’s history, celebrate its achievements and look towards the future of European space in its hands.

As an agency, Esa is completely unique. While all other space agencies are federal in nature, funded directly by the government to which they belong, Esa is more like a club. European countries form the club’s membership and each pays a contribution, based on gross domestic product (GDP), to cover the cost of activities.

Esa has its origins in two separate agencies, one to develop a launch system, the European Launch Development Organisation (Eldo) and a second to develop spacecraft, the European Space Research Organisation (Esro). These came into existence in 1964, when the conventions governing them were signed.

The Gaia mission has been mapping the stars of the Milky Way. ESA

Esro was hugely successful, establishing itself as a leader in space exploration, but Eldo had many political, cost and technological challenges.

As a result, Eldo was downsized and merged with Esro to form Esa in 1975, with ten founding members: Belgium, Germany, Denmark, France, United Kingdom, Italy, The Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and Spain. Ireland joined later that year. The membership has continued to expand alongside the enlargement of the European Union, although not all Esa members are part of the EU and vice versa. Fortunately for the UK, withdrawal from the EU did not mean leaving Esa.

At present, Esa has 23 member states, three associate members and cooperation agreements with five others, including Canada. The enormous diversity of membership of Esa makes it a complex organisation.

It is led by a council and a director general. The council represents the member states (with Canada also having seat on council). The director general is appointed by the council to represent the agency in the delivery of the programme. They oversee the agency’s various functions in space such as human spaceflight, Earth observation and space science.

The Sentinel satellites are part of the Copernicus Earth observation programme. Esa

About every three years, the council meets at ministerial level to consider funding, agree budgets for the following three-year period and set the direction of travel for the agency. The focus on representation and input from member states allows for wide engagement between Esa and the space community at-large. However, the price of this “democracy” can sometimes be seen in bureaucratic processes.

Measuring the contribution of Esa is not straightforward across the complexities of the organisation, but some benefits and successes are very clear. A relatively small country, like the UK, could never deliver science on the scale and scope of an organisation like Nasa. Membership of Esa allows us to join with other countries to compete at this level.

Europe has an independent ability to launch satellites into space in the form of the Arianespace company, which was created by Esa and the French space agency (Cnes). Esa also has an astronaut programme and access to the International Space Station, with the agency having provided part of the space station’s structure. The agency has leading space, planetary and Earth observation science programmes.

Huygens lands on Titan.

Scientists, companies and the public in member states benefit from all the investment in Esa. Esa has also had some unique successes. It was the first space agency to land a probe on an icy moon, Titan, the largest moon of Saturn, and on a comet.

Esa’s Copernicus Earth observation programme uses satellites to monitor the health of our planet, helping understand climate change and supporting the lives of individuals through improvements to agriculture and air pollution. In space science, the Gaia mission has provided a high precision map of our galaxy, revolutionising our knowledge in every area of astronomy.

Esa plans to launch a rover to Mars to search for life. ESA/ATG Medialab

Esa’s success has been built on thoughtful and regular planning. In the next few years, we will see Esa land a rover on Mars, to search of evidence of life. Large new space observatories are under development to study gravitational waves and X-rays from the Universe.

We are about to embark on the next phase of space science, called “Voyage 2050”. This will look towards landing on an icy moon in the outer solar system in search of a sub surface ocean and possible life within it.

Esa is not a perfect organisation. Its wide membership can make it challenging to organise projects and take decisions about the direction of the agency. However, it is not subject to the whim of any single government, and it offers a stable backdrop to space activities across Europe.

Without it, our economies, social capital and science programmes would be poorer. Therefore, I would like to toast Esa on its 50th birthday, say thanks for all it has given me as a space scientist throughout my career and wish it an amazing future.

[dailyanarchistposts]

The question of organisation

How do we coordinate with one another, comrades and beyond, in order to transform society? The history of anarchism – especially its most revolutionary moments – is rich with examples of large, formal organisations that concentrated most or all aspects of the struggle within a single structure. These were organisations of synthesis, some of which still exist: they promote a specific political programme, hold periodic congresses to make unified decisions, and aim to serve as a mediator between power and the masses. However, it would be a big mistake for anarchists to place such an organisation – indeed, the route of formal organisation altogether – at the centre of revolutionary struggle today. At the very least, the option should be considered only in light of some major risks.

Consider, for one, the central tension of any anarchist organisation: the trade-off between size and horizontality. The larger an organisation becomes, the more hierarchy becomes necessary to maintain its basic functions – in other words, the more quantitatively successful the organisation, the less anarchist it can be. This is something no amount of conscious procedures, such as consensus decision-making or a rigid constitution, can successfully alleviate. As a matter of necessity, any organisation incorporating thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of members can maintain direction and coherence only at the cost of extensive specialisation. In particular, those tasks that command the most influence – mediation, accounting, publicity – begin to stagnate in the hands of a few experts, either implicitly or explicitly. And what a sorry outcome that offers: any large anarchist organisation soon becomes incapable of prefiguring the very world it’s supposed to be building, the principle of nonhierarchical association relegated to a mere abstraction. If there’s any doubt on this point, that can only be because the vast majority of anarchist organisations remain woefully small nowadays. An honest look at the towering bureaucracy of the CNT in Spain during the 1930s – the largest anarchist organisation there’s ever been, incorporating a million and a half members – provides an unambiguous picture.

The link between formal organisation and hierarchy runs deeper yet; besides internal hierarchies, a second major problem concerns external ones. Built into the logic of the organisation of synthesis is the hidden assumption that ordinary people are incapable of organising themselves. Society is split between the passive masses on the one hand, and the enlightened revolutionaries on the other; the role of revolutionaries cannot be to engage horizontally with the rest of the population, but instead to approach them from the point of view of recruitment or education, to make them one of us. All potential social realities are distilled into a single way of doing things, as if we alone hold the one true set of revolutionary aims and principles. Such a monolithic approach was never realistic, much less so today: honestly speaking, most people will never see the need to join our organisation, to stomach all the long meetings and tedious subculture. The 21st century has ushered in a human condition that’s unfathomably complex, calling for a much richer diversity of organisational forms than the “one big union” model that worked so well in the past. That means opening ourselves up to a more pluralistic notion of struggle, one that abandons any notions of revolutionary primacy, especially that of the organisation of synthesis.

It isn’t even as if what formal organisations lack in principle they make up for in pragmatism. Merely in terms of their capacity to actually engage in struggle, the organisation of synthesis has proven ineffective. Any structure of significant size must spend the bulk of its time and energy merely on maintaining itself, the task of physically confronting power always coming second. Meetings are now insufferably long, and the only viable collective decisions have become increasingly timid and legalistic, members always going for the lowest common denominator just so everyone can agree. Having succumbed to the quantitative game of putting recruitment before all else, reputation has become a prime virtue, and combative actions are normally condemned in the name of not upsetting public opinion. Compromise and conciliation are instead always favoured by the emerging bureaucracy, the rank and file of the organisation betrayed time and time again. Nor could it be any other way: with obvious leaders, headquarters, and membership lists, the threat of state repression is forever present, severely limiting the scope of militant activity. What you’re left with, therefore, after funnelling so much time and effort into a grand synthesising effort, is a lumbering, introspective mass that can be used for little more than putting the brakes on real struggle.

With this critique in mind, some would respond that the risks posed by the organisation of synthesis are indeed a necessary evil. Perhaps this route offers us something quite indispensable, namely, the prospect of unity itself? The nation state towers over us more ominously than ever, its military, police force, and repressive technology contained within a single, cohesive structure. It might seem like folly not to build our own structure, rigid and undivided, to contend with power on its own terms – an organisation stronger and more unified than the state itself.

However, the problem with taking unity as an end it itself, rather than simply as a tool to be applied depending on the situation, is that it actively invites the concentration of power. Any structure that fancies itself to be building the new world in the shell of the old can only turn out to be a state in waiting. Remember that social hierarchy, besides being localised in certain physical objects, is also a state of mind; it’s always seeking to revive itself, and nobody is immune to the threat, anarchists included. We need not repeat the painful lessons of the past: there’s never been a large organisation of synthesis that hasn’t also been stale and bureaucratic, even subtly authoritarian, functioning like a political party to the extent it grows in size, ultimately favouring to collaborate with power rather than destroy it. This is no attempt to denigrate some of the most inspiring moments of anarchist history, but we also need to learn some hard lessons; let’s not forget the integration of the CNT into the government during the Spanish Civil War, to the extent that even an anarcho-syndicalist trade union ended up running its own forced labour camps.

Fortunately, though, this critique warrants no strategic compromise. In short, the quality of unity is essential only for those movements attempting to seize power rather than dismantle it. Amongst Marxists, liberals, and fascists alike, unity is the vital ingredient of their organising, the intention almost always being to assume the functions of the state in one sense or another. Without unity, the state is inconceivable; such a complex structure can only function properly when operating in a centralised way, forming a robust whole that maintains cohesion by relaying orders to the different parts. Any genuine shows of diversity are a threat to its integrity, because they undermine the singularity of the social body, lessening the capacity for a single will to be imposed upon it. But remember just how little applicability this framework has to our own desires: the point isn’t to emulate the state, as if to treat it as a rival, but instead to destroy it. And for this project a fundamentally different logic is required.

Here’s an idea: as far as effective libertarian struggle is concerned, a high degree of multiformity is the essential ingredient. There’s much to be said for social movements that are messy and fragmented, even to the extent that you’re not looking at a single movement any more, but many different ones with fuzzy lines between them. Building strong links between different fronts of the struggle is essential for encouraging one another to go further, yet the circulation of energies must also remain decentralised, diffuse, or else risk denying vigour to key areas of engagement. The repressive task undertaken by power – by the media, especially – will always be to sculpt us into a cohesive subject, something with discernible leaders and demands, which can thus be easily crushed or assimilated. This is why the struggle must always prize a diversity of tactics and perspectives, empowering all participants to fight on their own basis, and for their own reasons, yet nonetheless against a common enemy.

Multiform struggles are far too disjointed and unpredictable for the state to repress in a straightforward way, and also for the Left to co-opt. They’re more inviting to newcomers as well, offering massive variation of potential involvement, allowing everyone to find their niche without compromising. And multiform struggles, finally, are much more effective at going on the offensive, given that the structures of domination are nowadays far too multifaceted and complex – quite devoid of any centre – for a monolithic approach to successfully unhinge. It would be far better to avoid the fatal error made both by formal organisations and armed struggle groups, namely, to engage with the state symmetrically, in a frontal assault, which is precisely where it will always be militarily superior.

Often we see a split between comrades as a disaster, but that depends entirely on your perspective: diversity is only a curse only when crammed into the stubborn rubric of a movement demanding unity. Remember that it’s rarely the differences between us that cause conflict, but instead one’s refusal to respect them. Such differences are inevitable, and we should be thankful, too, because disagreement is one of the surest signs of vitality, if not of freedom itself. Especially with the struggle for total liberation – defined, in part, by the plurality of its concerns – these unavoidable differences can only be a blessing. The challenge is merely to nurture disagreement respectfully, bearing in mind that, despite the divergent methods we employ, each of these is ultimately grounded in a shared need to dismantle social hierarchy altogether.

* * *

This critique surely begs the question: if not formal organisation, what instead? For some time already, insurrectionary anarchists have been organising the attack mainly through small affinity groups, often incorporating around half a dozen (or fewer) comrades. Affinity here refers to reciprocal knowledge and mutual bonds of trust, as well as a shared project for intervening in society. Affinity groups are temporary and informal, incorporating no official members or branches, refusing to take numerical growth as a basic goal. One doesn’t “join” an affinity group any more than you join a group of friends; the act of signing up to an organisation is done away with, including the largely symbolic notion of involvement it offers. Theoretical agreement is often a good starting point for building affinity, but the vital thing is to find those with whom one can combine long-term trajectories for practical engagement – an ongoing process in which discussion is only the first step.

By remaining small and tightly-knit, affinity groups remain unhindered by the cumbersome procedures that inevitably come with organising as a mass. They can respond to any situation with utmost rapidity, continually revising the plan in light of unexpected developments, melting away whenever faced with unfavourable odds. This fluid, informal terrain of struggle is also immensely difficult for law enforcement to map out and undermine, especially when it comes to infiltration. A decentralised anatomy shouldn’t discourage groups from coordinating with one another horizontally, fostering the broader networks of friendship and complicity necessary to undermine power on a large scale. The point is only that affinity groups remain fully autonomous, in no way bound to sacrifice spontaneity for the sake of cohesion, always waiting for the green light from some higher body prior to taking action. Perhaps this description sounds familiar: anonymous, flexible, and leaderless, such is exactly the informal composition utilised with great success by the ALF/ELF. The main difference is that insurrectional struggle includes a broader range of activity, the question of how best to generalise revolt always taken into consideration.

In any case, large anarchist organisations are apparently a thing of the past, having disintegrated in unison with the workerist glue that once held them together. But that doesn’t mean we’re in the clear. There’s still a very real risk of exactly the mindset underpinning the organisation of synthesis – the emphasis on uniformity and respectability, as well as the subtle mistrust of autonomous struggle – merely reinventing itself in whatever contemporary form, as it will always attempt to do. We saw exactly that manifest in the bureaucratic, centralising tendencies that stifled much of the energy of Occupy and Nuit Debout (most memorably, there were those who refused to condone absolutely anything that hadn’t first received permission from the general assembly). This insistence on sculpting a multiform population into a monolithic subject – in essence, the determination to lay down the law – is always lurking amongst movements with revolutionary potential. Perhaps it’s no exaggeration to say that such an attitude, writ large, is exactly what devoured the initial beauty of the 1789 French Revolution, 1917 Russian Revolution, and 2011 Egyptian Revolution alike. Almost all previous revolutions were defined at first by a spontaneous, ungovernable outpouring of discontent; once that energy lost pace, however, it was gradually remoulded into representational forms – elections, negotiations, bureaucracy – and its original content decisively choked out. Between these two phases, the possibility of a revolution that gets to the root of dismantling power, rather than merely reshuffling it, depends on eliminating this second phase completely. In its place, the first must be extended towards encompassing the whole of everyday life. Informal organisation facilitates this outcome to the highest degree, precisely because it promotes a terrain of struggle that is inconvertible to the functions of state power.

In any case, nothing offered here amounts to a complete blueprint. This is not a programme! Comrades might well decide, according to their local circumstances, that some degree of formal organisation remains indispensable for tasks such as getting new people involved, planning aboveground events, and procuring resources. Which is to say, once again, that the conclusion offered here is only a minimal one: formal organisations cannot be considered the locus of revolutionary struggle altogether, as may have been the case in years gone by. They must instead be ready to adopt a more modest, supportive role, sticking to objectives both specific and temporary, remaining eager to take a step back or even disband entirely if needed. Rather than falling back on outdated formulas, tired and inflexible, total liberation means embracing the fullest multiformity, wild and ungovernable – the only kind of energy capable of bringing social hierarchy to ruin.