#That being said his punishment is meant to be an ironic representation of his actions (or lack thereof)

[eeefroggyeee]

What did Curly do?

He refused to take responsibility for Jimmy as his captain and friend and only offered to talk to him when Anya confessed about being raped. He was not willing to take any action against him despite knowing how he is, resulting in everyone getting hurt. He let Jimmy into the cockpit and then acts surprised when something goes wrong. He sat and watched everything happen and THEN decided he wanted to fix things. In the end, he’s just like the mouthwash; Too sweet to effectively eradicate germs. It’s just like Jimmy himself said, “It’ll kill you before anything else”

[stark-defense-squad]

I actually remember reading this on the anti Wanda maximoff tag some time ago,but it really made an impact.the post was talking about how Wanda stans/tony antis shit on tony for trying to kill Bucky(which he wasn't bc he would have destroyed him,we've all seen iron man 2 and 3.if he wanted you dead you'd be dead)but like rabidly support Wanda and her revenge.

When I said I wanted more female representation in the MCU, this was not what I meant.

Honestly, Wanda stans give me a worse headache than cap stans. At least with Cap stans, Ik they’re just falling for that stupid USA propaganda. Other than being fooled by her white woman tears™️, idk wtf is wrong with her stans.

Wanda fully aware chose to join Hydra, a neo-nazi organization, as an adult, just because they were offering her “revenge” on Tony Stark, which makes her a fucking neo-nazi. She consciously decided to use her powers to mind-rape the Avengers. She actively decided to send the Hulk on a rampage to kill innocent civilians. She actively supported Ultron up until she realized she was one of the fucking humans he was going to wipe out, which makes her joining the Avengers a conflict of interest at best and pure self preservation/manipulation at worst. And all of that is just Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Later, she murders POC innocent civilians because she has no control over her powers, then gets upset and throws a fit when Tony says, “hey, maybe you shouldn’t be on life-or-death missions when you can’t control your powers”. Imagine if someone who didn’t know how to use a gun waltzed into the middle of a highly stressful mission in the middle of civilian ground with a machine gun, murdered innocent people, then got upset that they had to face consequences.

Then she throws a fit when someone suggests her microwave boyfriend’s life is less important than millions of innocent civilians, and with Cap’s support, thousands of Wakandans (black Africans) are killed, for nothing might I add considering she did a shit job and Thanos still got a hold of Vision’s stone, and half of the universe is snapped.

And woe is she, so she loses control of her powers, again, and enslaves a whole fucking city. But she didn’t know! So when she finds out that she’s hurting all of them, she throws another fit and forces them to continue playing along with her little fantasy.

And not once has she ever learned from any of her mistakes. Not once has she been humbled. Not once has she been forced to face the consequences of her actions. In fact, for her mistakes, others are punished.

But it’s alright. All of this is alright. She’s grieving and traumatized after all. Right? Because Tony Stark killed her parents with his bomb when she was a child.

Cry me a river. Why doesn’t she try to get revenge on the terrorists that deployed the bombs? Why does she actively choose to be an entitled cunt and put thousands of POC lives at risk? Why does she join a fucking neo-nazi organization?

Imagine going “oh I’m sad, I’ll join the KKK to feel better”.

But Tony is rich and she’s a white woman and she cries on screen.

And that, right there, is their logic I guess.

[om-headcanon]

☆ mc catching the obey me brothers crying

i believe its fair to assume mc has seen at least one of the boys cry. here is what i believe happened. (if you want me to do undateables, let me know! tw for low self worth, panic attacks, and survivors guilt/death mentions)

lucifer

without a doubt the most embarassed to be caught crying

he had just gotten into an argument with diavolo, and he questions his importance in diavolos life

he goes into the study to get some extra work done late at night to reassure himself he is useful

with all of the stress from the situation at hand and some stress from supporting the family on his back, he cant help but shed a few tears

all he wants to do is keep those around him happy and healthy... and it tears him apart when he cant

if i cant make the ones i love happy then... what can i do...

he doesnt notice your presence, as he has hands over his eyes and is breathing slowly in order to relax himself

you call out his name softly to get his attention

lucy jumps and tries wiping his eyes and playing it off as if he was never crying

you walk closer to him and he keeps inquiring if theres anything you need

you dont say anything, you just place your arms around him and hold him in a tight embrace

and he starts crying again on your shoulder... harder, this time. holding you tighter and closer in the embrace

because of his pride, its hard for him to admit what he needs the most: someone to show they care for him

mammon

mammon is the type to not cry often but when he does, its a lot

while his brothers dont really have bad intentions, the daily degradation they execute against mammon really gets to him

he can only put up his confident front for so long, and not long after a fight with asmo, it recedes

he lay on his bed sobbing heavily into a pillow to muffle the sound for nearly a full hour

his mind cant help but insist all the words his siblings tell him are true... and he wishes more than anything that you were there to tell him they werent

he looks up to the door every once in a while with blurry vision, mind convincing him theyre at the door, but you not being there makes him cry even harder

maybe they just think the same as the rest of my brothers

he hears the doorknob, but convinces himself its his mind again. ironically enough, this makes him cry even harder

except its actually you this time

you run over to his bed to sit down next to him and rub his back reassuringly, asking if hes alright

he jolts up, shocked youre actually here. he closes his mind and smiles sadly with a tear stained face

he pulls you into an embrace and whispers a soft thank you... your presence helps him more than you will ever know

you hold him for a few minutes and tell him how awesome the Great Mammon really is

leviathan

its been a long stressful day at rad, and he cant help but overthink every single action he has made

every single glance hes made, every single word hes said ... just everything

most days he would resort to playing a game or watching an anime he loves in attempt to distract himself, but other days its not that easy

he starts spiraling, thinking of not only everything hes done that day, but actions hes done in the past too

eventually hes past the point of no return, and starts having a panic attack

levi cant seem to catch his breath and with the thoughts still rushing through his head at full speed, he cant attempt to calm himself down

he envies those who dont feel the way he does right now because god, what he would do to not feel like this

you were just wondering why your gaming buddy hasnt come looking for you so naturally, you go to him

you knock on his door waiting for him to ask you for the entry code... but theres no response

you enter and are quite shocked to see levi shaking on his bed

this is familiar to you... whether youve had to guide a friend through a panic attack or have been through one yourself, you know what to do

you reassure him this will all pass and knowing how hard school is for him, you tell him he did well today

you get him to regulate his breathing and gain some composure

hes embarassed you had to see him like that... but he lets you know hes so thankful that you came to help him

satan

he just wants to be his own person but with how his life was set for him, its almost as if thats a tall order

its very rare he cries from happiness or anything like that, but sometimes he gets so sad that he gets angry... and then he cries a lot

no one dares to go near him like that

and that hurts him too... that nobody could or would ever dare to console him because they fear what hed do to them

he acknowledges this is a justified fear as he is after all the representation of wrath itself, but it still hurts nonetheless

belphie decided to poke fun and tease satan reminding him of how hes lucifers shadow

he didnt take it well... and retreated to his room to handle his emotions

he knew his family didnt want anything to do with him while he was angry... and that made him feel like a burden

but he grew used to everyone expecting he handle his emotions himself even if every once in a while he desired some reassurance

satan sat in a corner of his room crying to himself waiting for this to pass because he didnt believe anyone else would care to check on him

but you were curious as to why he wasnt in his usual 4 pm reading spot, so you decided to check his room

he was just sat completely still staring into the distance while tears fell down his face

he didnt even notice your presence until you sat down next to him

you didnt want to pry, so you just asked if he wanted to talk about it

he shook his head, laid on your shoulder, and just said “this is all i need”

asmodeus

ahh... while self love is so easy for him, self value isnt

its easy for him to believe people want to be around him solely with lustful intent rather than because they genuinely love him

he doesnt really believe anyone could ever love him

so he overcompensates through self love because he believes hes the only person who could ever love him

hes great at hiding it but sometimes, this gets to him... especially after some quick encounters with others at the fall

he thinks maybe there is no depth to him.. maybe i really am just a pretty face and nothing else

asmo cries pretty often, but he only lets people see him cry when its over something material (ie, he couldnt get a new bag hes been wanting for weeks)

he cries quietly too in effort to make sure nobody sees him

he seemed to have forgetten that you two were planning to go shopping today so you went to his room to see if he was ready

you werent expecting to see him rolled over in bed softly crying to himself

you startled him when you said his name

“oh, mc, i didnt see you there!” he chuckles lightly to himself in effort to change the mood of the atmosphere as he wipes his eyes

you ask if hes okay and his sad smile falls slightly

he asks you if you genuinely think he could ever be lovable

your heart breaks a little knowing that he even has a moment of self doubt, but you reassure him that hes a lovable person inside and out

you hug him tightly while another tear falls down his face

you two decide shopping is best for another day... for now, you just want to talk and do facials

beelzebub

beel loves his family a lot

more than he loves food (also a lot)

he hates conflict between them and would do absolutely anything to avoid it

what he hates the most about himself is how hungry he gets... hes aware its poorly timed but theres really nothing he can do about it

but the feeling hes being an inconvenience to those he loves hurts him

beel is great at smiling as often as possible, but if theres any tension between the family, he wont stop crying until its resolved

once he was so hungry it wasnt possible to control himself and he ended up going on a rampage

he earned scolds from lucifer, mammon, and satan for this

it tore him apart knowing that he had caused his family trouble for even a second and he started crying because of the guilt

he couldnt even find enough energy to make it back to his room, so he just sat in the kitchen with tears on his face

you had decided to go to the kitchen to get a snack when you saw him

he apologized for being in the kitchen and offered to move if you wanted his seat, but you declined

beel didnt even bother wiping the tears from his eyes... he wore them like they were a punishment for his own behavior

when you asked him what was wrong, all he said was that he was a bad brother

you tried to tell him otherwise, but then he went into detail about the situation and how all he does is cause the family distress

you told him that isnt true at all and he continues to bring light and happiness to all those around him

hearing that his brothers will come around and know he meant no harm is all he needed to hear

“thank you, mc... i feel less hungry when im with you”

belphie

he has lots of survivors guilt

its been millenia but he still wishes that it was him instead of lilith

because of this he cries quite often, but never in front of anyone other than beel

this feeling that lilith and him should have traded places haunts him often, and its not always so easy to sleep it off

as fore mentioned, he usually finds comfort in talking to his older twin but beel isnt always there

beel was at one of his clubs at rad and belphie didnt want to bother him, but he really did need someone right now

unlike his older brothers, belphie actually makes an effort to find you

he doesnt find you in your room nor the kitchen, so he continues to search around the house in hopes youre around here somewhere

he happens to find you by yourself in the study on your d.d.d.

belphie feels bad bothering you, and enters the room quite quietly

“mc, can we talk?”

he sits down next to you and lays his head on your shoulder

contrary to what he stated he wanted, not much talking is being done

he just lies there quietly crying with no explanation why

he realises he may not be as ready to talk about it as he thought... but thats okay

you tell him that youre going to listen whenever hes ready to talk about it

that makes him feel a lot better

he falls asleep right there with a thankful smile placed on his face

[jwartblog]

Notes comp...

My brain had suddenly not thought the same way it did, oxygen isn’t getting to it the way it had, blood doesn’t run through it the way it had, it feels like, to a degree, an implosion, not unlike the shift that happens with tectonic plates at the earth’s surface. This means now I can hear my vertebrae at the base of my skull and beneath, the skull cracks at the fissures as if a point of gravity like a warp  is reshaping it. My decision making now is questionable, not criminally questionable, but the decisions I make veer off into peculiar themes, for instance, the whimsy of advertisements. The reactions to them are strong, which may be heightened by a coinciding isolation, all of which could be explained away as neuroses, as so much can be, but the integrity of the diagnosis that that could be is greatly compromised  by  intangibles. I surmise that this has intended to be, for one, a narcissists’ program, in which the language is designed to close off the possibility of social and cognitive maturation. It, instead, endlessly punishes reflection, reason, positive thinking to include any emotional flourishes of joy, exuberance, self-acceptance, an inclination towards the trajectory of all healthy development…It has, I believe destroyed–an embarrassingly easy remedy for all of this notwithstanding–the reward system, an internal resonance for clear thought and careful consideration–qualitative thinking. I can’t wrestle with concepts in the same way I have before. There was a more careful consideration that’s not there anymore, which means the work that I do could suffer for it. The brain is an array of sorts or at least behaves that way, a receiver of input, often vastly ego-centric, easily, near-instantly at the mercy of impulse, which has never quite been that way in adulthood, the way it is now. The formulation of words, increasingly what I would like to articulate comes from an alien place, not that what’s alien has the facility to manage words and construct documents the way I do, but it isn’t concerned with the same things I’m concerned with. What this means is the concern I have for, for example, certain social or creative issues is nearly bankrupt, which means the history of careful, qualitative reasoning and feeling towards those subjects seems gone. This means that that has to be cultivated again, because it necessarily has to be, but it also means a new apprehensiveness towards the retention of new information. Again, a weakening of the faculties, a constructed impairment. This brain, now, acts not unlike a computer server, as if somehow, the neurons were network nodes (not nodes of Ranvier), and all of the sensory duties of the imagining brain were outsourced to a remote terminal. This means, for example, a thought is met with, incorrectly, insufficiently, a thought meant to be thought, perhaps–because functional-integrity is compromised–genuine, is distorted or otherwise presented as if controlled by a foreign catalyst, a facility with thought, with concepts, i.e. design, creative flourishes are intercepted physically, cranially, as much as that can resonate physically, and it’s changed into something that I believe corresponds to what the intruder believes is how a person thinks or means to think. This means that a premium, ironic, considering the possibility that this is of a technological source, is placed on control, not at all on the preservation of thought, or the possibility for general thinking, let alone advanced thought. Whenever an attempt is made to achieve a state of lucidity about the current circumstances, a punishment ensues in the form of blackmail, again social mutilation (anti-social behavior) or some other accusation of criminality or gross immorality. This may be the longest instance of sexual harassment I know in recorded history, as my penis is critiqued multiple times an hour, from flaccid to erect state. It abhors erection, like it’s alien or criminal. All of it is finessed to some degree by an ambiguity, in this case humor amongst other things, the use of interpersonal acrobatics, the continuous promise of a later reward. For instance, one of the things that happens, and this plays off of an already-intrusive guerilla marketing, data-mine marketing (likely a cover for pure harassment), is the establishment of a visual language that always to some degree points to something being advertised, a product you might potentially buy, which on its face is innocuous. But upon closer inspection, it does seem to gain accuracy with each attempt at subverting the feeling of even casual autonomy, any sense of self that comes from personal decision making. What this means is that over time a kind of probabilistic thinking ensues as a reaction to constant probability based harassment(e.g. Probabilistic Psycho-Linguistic Verisimilitude and Infinitesimal Approximations of Neuro-Physiological Reception in Experience Perception. Memory-Thought modulation analysis in the conversion of external stimuli into creative thought and output, partly through continuous tracking of parallel experiential or verisimilarly stimulated brains of a large population sample, and reward system increasingly tailored to positive correlative confirmation signs. Behavioral analysis through the continuous introduction of external and internal stimuli and continuous tracking of subsequent associated epistemological formulations especially in regards to the subsequent introduction of symbolically-associated stimuli, stimuli congruent with particular, personal, accurate or inaccurate epistemological assumptions.). This has the potential to render the target overtly spatially and socially strategic…which can cause irrevocable overt symbolic-interactionism brought on by among other things, helplessness: the methods of harassment are slight and mimic the symptoms of still socially-maligned mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. If you can imagine, an artist, especially one adept at symbols, abstract representation, is made to feel that he or she is responding to what vaguely seems like a phallic or feminine image, and he is, for example, then made to know that he or she is somehow influenced by that prompt to purchase which confirms his or her latent homosexuality, over time this admonishment, necessarily slight, acts as a kind of whip, to which an artist necessarily would respond to with a re-habitual sort of inclination towards the object he wishes to avoid, however ambivalent he might be. Over time the whip makes the artist, like Pavlov’s oft mentioned canines, salivate at the ‘sound of a bell,’ i.e. whip. This kind of harassment I think maybe tends to coincide with what would be a delicate time for an artist, or anybody, especially an inwardly focused artist or person, transgression bound, piqued by curious psychological phenomena, bouts of clairvoyance, synchronistic peculiarities, a lot to navigate through without the addition of systematic, injurious harassment. If for instance it can be said that a person who constructs by some act of fate, his own clairvoyance, a streak of running into exactly what’s foreshadowed as a relational need or otherwise a break from an ideal state, is monitored by someone from an objective point of view who has knowledge of human behavior and the journey of humans, artists, he could potentially be subject to this knowledge, general knowledge, the artists’ knowledge, what the monitor knows the artist knows, what he knows many don’t know about these phenomena, the limits of their efforts to remedy the issue, to include among other things what would be professionally or socially unhygienic to pursue, and particular knowledge of marketing or other forms of harassment to cause irrevocable psychological damage. It keeps a record like a fingerprint for every instant of short and long term audio memory, neuro-instantaneous-configuration, and also manipulation at the cochlear nerves, perhaps induced neuron degradation aided by an overly nitrogen-rich diet that allows sounds to be affected. Either neuron or nerve frequencies are altered to match incoming frequencies, pressure disturbances that create sound. That means that as fast as the speed of sound, an incoming signal is intercepted before a conscious sensation of hearing can be registered. Also communication from preparatory (internal) speech center can be altered to fit incoming signal, or to conform incoming signal to preparatory (internal) speech (i.e. Attempts to further resolve name to voice, signal to name, voice/signal to image...performs as if it may not have specific local knowledge of content, but effects of it, how a datum associates with another datum (e.g. what regional voice and statement placates, even if the value of a statement or effect is unknown--how that's measured, how it's configured, what it means against other data, for instance, if a communal-neuro-topographical map worked with all measurable phenomena associated with brain activity), a relational database, e.g. what might correlate neuro-physiologically to what’s known through data-mining (what an image might sound like, what an algorithm for what an image is like, what a person thinks an image correlates to, would attempt to resolve if it had to ascertain the locus of significance in service of connecting data-processing-of-ephemera to verisimilitude in external thought processing, increasingly how an algorithm could think for you, could be used to subvert reasoned conclusions, to make empirical inquiry or research, entertainment, compromise trusted academic sources for instance by playing to statistically known impulses instead of supplying objective findings, papers, objective search results.) Points to what I had written earlier though about conquest through earnest action and exploitation of assumed unknowns. Audio converted in real-time to legible probable English (what the word most certainly will be at the start of pronunciation) audio interpretation is augmented by visual symbol confirmation, i. e. when audio fails, or when audio may certainly fail to be adequately echoed. Appears to analyze cord vibration state, speech initiation, and compares that against a database and predicts usage in tandem with image analysis, which could be gathered from a databank of images (Bing "like" image search) and image/word-concept association. The process of instantaneous ranking, a number assigned to every possible word outcome given an initial vocal cord vibration state, or speech initiation state, say 200 words starting with 'Bal...' (Ball, balcony, ballerina, balances, etc.). The words are then ranked based on probability which can begathered from historical usage and altered by the microsecond, nanosecond, etc., as the vibration, speech initiation, word formulation further produces a word outcome, until the dwindles to one word, or the listener is trained to hear one word out of possible multiple words, the most probable word given priority amplification. This code can be improved ad infinitum, based on linguistic, probabilistic, psychological, and environmental factors.  A listener, possibly an operator on duty somewhere might correct machine code (?) as he notices errors in operation). Sound retrieved from temporary or long term audio memory, as well as the preparatory audio center is manipulated (enhanced or otherwise, modulated, withheld or diminished to produce effect.). Semantics, kinesiology and ephemera analysis, computational linguistics, linguistics itself, sonar, lip reading, etc. coupled with near-real-time incoming quantitative and qualitative data stream can all be used to induce the feeling of a second presence, a second set of eyes with you, and this is--if we were to assume that the data stream is coming from a witting or unwitting transmitter; perhaps an surreptitious or agreed upon installation of a transceiver on the person of the subject--without including the possibility for manipulation of the central nervous system, the frequency that governs or instructs, for instance, heart palpations, the perception of touch. A person could be outright impaired in various ways directly, or indirectly by, for example, stress, what are known as pain-points, if a cue were abusive, as in Pavlov's experiments with dogs, if a known involuntary, or voluntary made near-involuntary by conditioning were triggered to induce, for instance, a fetal-position defensive reaction. Where perception-valleys are present, neuro-experiential displacement is allowed to flourish, that means that with the aid of 'in,' a provincial cue, regionalism in terms of perceptual-familiarity, a person could be lulled into one form of intelligence, say the idea that a person is highly efficient at guessing various truths about your condition based on incoming data, but when the observers' analytical peak reaches a crescendo, possibly employing the infinitesimal, in terms of what can be gleaned, and as this contrasts knowledge of, a comfort level with previous analysis-attempts, a person could incorrectly conclude the 'real' presence of another entity. Audio-psychology, or other physio-neuro sensations can be used to create stories, especially if the belief-quotient of the participant/study/victom is high. Most people are not self-critical down to their neuro makeup, the particular universe of their mind and brain. Perception valleys, but for now, in as much as what's known about what it could know shows change modulated by location and some activity, for instance, a steady increase in rate of accuracy, or due to the fallibility of the senses generally but a known unreliability made increasingly more unreliable by sense-degradation, perception itself of this rate of change has to be called into question, as well as a perception valley, not only instances of impressions of what's known, but also for rates of change. While it can certainly be gleaned that some things are known (that had been, for instance, known to be unknown, in some cases unknowable particularly) and gleaned that some things are being increasingly known, there's still what's already known which is (x, unknown in quantity, quality, thus 0 to infinite, bad to extensive), and what's is increasingly being known that can't be known, that's changing at a rate that's congruent with known rates of change or not. Simultaneously, with that system there's a presentation of it, altruistically perhaps seeks partly, which may itself be a function of an outcome (to disinform, socially engineer some degree of.(cont.)..some degree of ambivalence, a familiarity with a signal presence to undercut the severity of what's being performed, to provide the illusion of a bevy of expected mercies, plethora of cognitive biases such as religious assurance by way of affiliation, assurance based on regionalism, etc. Mentalist tricks, and tricks such as game participation, match-maker, religion-based such as relieving you of talents buried, muscles not adequately used, which can lead to further illogical trains of thought.) to steer thought away from accurately assessing the scenario in general, the general nature of the problem, the specific nature of aspects of the physical problem, to attain a specific and/or general end through whatever can be suggested, including, as stated before, involuntary or near-involuntary responses to audible stimuli, which can provide new data. Other intrusive-(faux) inner-directed sensory cues can function in the same capacity. What's problematic, obvious, but needs to be made plain is that if more is known than prepared for or conceived, than more can be known based on responses to what's assumed to be known, for instance if internal functions of a subject are known, but the subject doesn't know that this is known, he will perform defense maneuvers internally, assuming that he is protecting something unknown. The information gathered from what’s newly known, now that along with internal functions known, the subject has unknowably provided, internal defense maneuvers, can be used to subdue another similar party or subject, or disarm the subject unawares, as they say, so that the subject's assumptions make him incapable of conceiving of a collapse externally orchestrated, thus attempting to solve an internal problem assuming an internal origin, not to mention, the peculiar conundrum that would arise if the subject knew what was known. Every response provides data, so nothing can be done, tactically, that wouldn't make worse the circumstances. If, what's known and had been known, for instance, is thought itself, an ability that would naturally need to be kept under-wraps, and along with thoughts known, thought processes, tendencies, probability, etc., now even a common sense response (silence, repose, a stalemate) is data, itself a maneuver. The continuum to some degree as much as feasible is the most appr. response. In terms of 'maneuvering' around this problem, what seems to me the most pragmatic approach is to, at the least, facilitate open communication (in qualitative proportions) relative to, or as a function of a rate of degradation of value certainties such as primarily the lived life, as much as valued the vital organs, the sustainment of societal functions. I.e. What can't be openly stated that needs to be has to be increasingly openly stated in measures where the positive difference (what's preserved) between what's stated and what's prevented by openly stating is optimal. In what can possibly take place, voluntary or involuntary reaction to perception valley nadirs (closest to truth, gravity), actual knowns could make more real unknowns, exacerbate the perception of a  truth, accuracy in reflected/echoed truth, i.e. a known thought known could make more real the perception of a thought known, causing a relinquishing of a hold, a defense due to that assumption, that something is definitely known, or a certain capability of knowing is certainly known. Or in not knowing a thought is known, a knowing center is known, a person could activate defenses that become newly known data, available to disarm. The knowing that's synthetic, that means to make real a data-mined synopsis of a history and now, as much as real-time reporting and application can be that, has approximated the sensation of knowing, as I've said before, so the physiological indication of what it means to have thought, or applying a thought, especially to some external prompt--itself made to seem internally orchestrated, yet an outside prompt, the idea that some other entity, at least the way I would dream of it, is supplying a question that requires an answer, an answer I'm willing to readily give: the neuro-physiological sensation that I am, in a semi-conscious state, the recipient of a question asked of me by someone not me, the idea that it has to be answered, and that the options available, the memory or knowledge bank known is what's actually there, and all that's there, the idea and correlating sensation that that answer is the right one, that I have thought that thought, the desire to interact, that the voice supplied is of the image it's associated with, and that the subject would communicate in this way as a matter of fact, the rendering of the image to, beyond the fact of it's value--how well it's rendered, which is desired to fall into a valley of non-consideration, a given too well constructed to be fully-appreciated in a way that allows for effect-reception  to subside and reasonableness to return tide and sufficiently critique--supply an increasing nudge towards what would be still not be a too unreasonable delusion of grandeur--of the grandiosity in each behavior of mine, as it's perceived, or some major failing of sense, that the elements of unconsciousness and visualization that would have to exist to make that point clear are what's actually there, and that that point made is one most salient, like a vacuum, that renders null excess-not-instantaneously-anti-thesis to what it means to convey, to make self-evidently true, that this is more than enough for completion--the sense of it that can guide, though, as I've written many years ago, truth and completion are separate things; one seeks conclusion when truth is tedious, and conclusiveness seeks truth when it's methodology and intentions are dubious, are questionable, to dress expedience, the rhythm of being undeniably-seemingly right or smart-sounding. But writing this, too, in a lucid wakeful state is subject to question, as I've left a state verifiably not my subconscious, the striving moment to moment is compromised as well, the certainty of whether or not impetus is genuine, has been eroded, outside of what's objectively, perhaps statistically sound in the findings of a most-reliable scientifically verified and peer reviewed analysis, and there's evidence that impulse itself, moment to moment, is directed by inauthentic catalysts--intentionally and directly orchestrated by some external source. What it could mean to allude to is simulacrum, but that's a psychosis term publicly. It's connected to weaving varying stories together that have 'no rights whatsoever' to be linked! Speed is not truth, nor is public consensus, nor is the spectre of utter demoralization and humiliation. In these conditions it's certainly difficult to objectively and somehow artfully probe into the idea of creation that seeks creation, or always in preparation of some future ideal. This is me inundated in another consciousness. The reasoning is now foreign, too. It has been that way for some time, but there's less of an obvious differentiation between the way I would feel about certain topics, even in sleep state that's barely leaving unconsciousness. The only way to maintain a sense of objectivity now is largely because of the nature of the thoughts themselves. Partly the game that's played here is rewarding the subject, in this case, me, with a right to healthy sleep, external peace through a decent lack of debilitating continuous sexual harassment, emotional abuse, discreet sexual and psychological assault, if I don't fight against diminishing qualitative thinking, which is preserving my identity. The continuous narcissistic drone that induces unhealthily defensive immediately rectifying mindset (of course at the expense of longterm planning and almost all deep, carefully considered thought). For instance, it continues as if there's some known secret violent, or sexually deviant behavior performed that has to come to light, of course through this style of torture. What it actually seems to be more and more is a conditional crime pre-punishment, a future-looking consequence based on inductive reasoning--ideally the crime, that, when this discreet torment has been completed, will, by its nature, have proven all of the tortuous actions taken upon me, just. But I believe this is based on a hunch that's arisen from the belief in congruence of data from a particular surveillance, even more daunting if that surveillance was coupled with conditioning by persons who would seek this outcome, the justification for that kind of surveillance and discreet torment then. This information, however,  doesn't prove the truth of any one act, only the perceived likelihood, perhaps in the court of public opinion, which isn't sufficient. The persuasion that's continuously transmitted is, in a semi-conscious state, even made to seem to be me at the gut of consciousness--i.e. what it would feel like, neuro-physiologically to think and know it's me thinking--slyly, disarmingly persuading someone else to follow a line of thought that's anti-thesis to what I'd most like to suggest, but it may actually fit in more with what would be congruent with the evidence that supports the truth of an instance of transgression, which is what's sought after. At this point, it's really only the fact that I don't think those things, that I don't consider that content and often thus(thereby) genuinely don't like it, that confirms for me, the foreignness of it. It does tend to resemble what's described by Foucalt in Madness and Civilization when he says that power itself takes this route regardless of the people who associate themselves with it, so that all persons in those positions that act as factors in this system behave as needed to support an outcome. In that book he describes three tactics the asylum-keepers use to sedate the subject, longterm*: silencing through ex-communication, through various means, ending regular social interaction; playing to, however belittling it is and beknownst it is to the subject, their idea of grandiosity, their belief of their superiority or deep importance, the delusion that they're a high-ranking official or royalty or a celebrity, whether or not they actually really feel that way, even if they only play along to someone else's suggestion; and the third escapes me, but it believe it has something to do with thwarting immediate goals. Fear is another tactic, or some kinds of trauma tantamount to what traumatic occurrence has caused an initial inhibition ( as flawed as that sounds), and the use of family-ties to persuade, to bring the subject to his right-mind, the definition of which is malleable as necessary like-wise, like what I had written earlier, to justify the tactics used, often what's sought is an ideal external to who the person actually is, an unchanged personality that's often only what it has to be to put loved-one's  minds at ease...for instance a person could finish school and be considered insane because, for example, school is ‘unnatural’ for his ilk (by way of his new knowledge he's writes or speaks like he aims to escape himself, or belittle rather than enlighten--usually the case when there's class-transcendence, when the actual numbers for progress are lost on an insular community, the national goal of education, or how education actually relates to affluence or career success, or gives a country it's competitive edge--generally preferred-- regardless of provincial opinions about individual cases), so a community could be persuaded, by the nature of their conditioning, to right the wrong of his enlightenment, to prevent continual learning, to, as overtly illegal and unethical as it is, seal off any chance for further naturally-resulting intellectual development. The problem in 2020 is that the knowledge of these conditions and disorders are known and that increasingly that knowledge is used to mislead the unwitting or support defamation or serve as peripheral intangibles used to wrong someone, i.e. it's weaponized. So street level skullduggery graduates and with the science of thought, there is increasing certainty, less error, so that the chance for something like this, an objective document, is less and less reliable. This might not be a reliable document. There could be for instance a gradual move towards planned happenstance, that secures planned outcomes. I had mentioned the systematic prevention of enlightenment or discreet impairment of the brain as it might be used for, for instance, discrete maths, or quantum mechanics, so lineage, documented familial inclination towards higher-learning, may more and more be seen as insurance against this. Gradually I'm made to become more and more comfortable with a second presence in mind, who, before any guarantee of compensation or noticeable benefit implores me to 'get out' or 'go up' or do a myriad of things as if I can, at will, make those outcomes happen, or as if the fact of my being or maturation isn't in itself, right, or self-evidently wrong. What it feels like, as I've stated before is rape, a marathon of rape-marathons, that itself forcibly becomes a new norm, and I'm responsible for my own pain, guilty for being violated, guilty for being hurt or protesting the rape-marathon in any way at any given time, especially if that protest gives some semblance of respite. The idea is to simply have it stop: I would like it to stop, I have never known this to exist, It was never a reality to me, I don't want it, I have nothing to prove. I only have to become more intimate with what I'm most interested in, and this something I can do without any help. The goal is the extensive depletion of the brain, mind, and eventually everything else. The prize, I believe, is what would strike a person who might encounter me, what would constitute a strength, and so one might like to see me or someone, for example, lose their ability to think in the way they are accustomed to thinking, especially if it's unique or adequate, or proven. Reasons can be as malleable as they have to be, to be sure I don't pontificate or don't mull over problems in the same way. There's an urgency in disrupting creation or thought production that reminds me of poverty-stricken children battling for crumbs or pieces of food, a certain scarcity-mindedness, or zero-sum, end-game, stubbornness. The chief goal here would be sabotage for highly-personal ego-driven reasons, not reasonableness. I'm made to believe that I should make some arbitrary authority my authority where there is none, and one is certainly not wanted or needed. There are large amounts of external stimuli present around me under the guise of helping me think. What this means is a demeaning attempt to forcibly outsource responsibility, which I believe is to make me comfortable with encroachment, especially to reveal private information, even information it is illegal for me to knowingly reveal, illegal for someone to forcibly extract from me, or frame me for relinquishing. Even as thoughts or thinking can be approximated, specific thoughts are more and more echoed in media, but not as general foresight or the synchronicity-high that follows a break from the ideal, a relational dependency, what state of being and thinking would have to take place to make sufficient meaning, or the actual events as genuinely foreseen meaningful encounters, but something else, almost as if I can't think unless each thought is good enough( this bypasses the feat of controlling each thought to even close to that extent to begin with), which they can never be if they're subjectively assessed, and goodness itself has to be questioned here if thoughts are more and more produced (which they are) by some far less adequate (for what I do) external transmitter, as preposterous as this sounds, the fact that I would ever have to consider a second presence in mind as a police for any reason. *The third here was constant references to the past--the asylum keeper would find a way to have the subject ensnared in his own past, which they could always refer to, if they've been keeping good notes, and the subject would ideally keep searching for some answer not readily given--partly due to an unkempt or unreliable memory in tandem with continual subliminal and overt cues to stop actively thinking--but instigated by past psychologically unresolved occurrences that are constantly urgently alluded to, one by one, until a certainty is achieved that further sedates the subject. Non-empowering recollection. More and more, in the morning and at other times, like in Iowa, in the morning, a foreign personality takes over, in the same way a foreign laugh did then,  a foreign consciousness, for instance what would be the way I would seem to go in a more generically paternalistic manner (and also paternalism or masculinity as brutishness, manliness as primitiveness), a voice less fluid, a word selection accounts for less nuance, which is even less refined than the initial incapacitation of the basal ganglia, other parts of the brain responsible for high level processing of concepts and a usual work-history-consistent manner of contemplation: what would work for flavors of contemplation, art-thinking for art-writing. More and more the spine is the outermost protruding part of skeleton behind me, the skull is continually pushed forward, the trapezoids are tightened and forced high along with my shoulders (to sit at the top of my torso not at the sides) and ass is coached to increasingly remain tucked under, the back is therefore elongated and bows outward like a bulldog where it approaches the neck(notes from earlier: There’s a constant incoming at a particular numerical rate, a transmission of the kind of stimuli that can’t be easily thwarted. One of the things this results in, or has occurred in this instance alongside it is an ever tightening of the muscles around the trapezius and upper latissimus dorsi, the sides and back of the neck. Quickly, it feels primitive, not in that a person who is muscular there is primitive, but that it feels like the option to deviate from that is increasingly gone. The top half of the skull increasingly sinks into the lower one, the eyes are forced close together than normal–it more and more resembles down syndrome. It feels like it, too. Due a lack of sleep, and again, continuous aggression the eyes are sort of recessed into darkened skin that sits inside the eye sockets. What I have now, what I use to make art is a kind of secondary vision, it’s a secondness  of vision. That sense is merely accessing footage, which I translate by way of recollection of what an ideal visual encounter was like. Again, the skull takes primacy, the eyes are a happenstance of the skull. My teeth are slowly reaching the beginning stages of brittleness, which I’ve seen happen quickly almost unnaturally to people I know.), a layman's cognitive consonance is expected to result from daily nudging to escape yourself, to 'leave your head,' as if leaning forward, an animalistic lean is what would make a person more himself. The overall goal is to completely disrupt bodily coordination. What this means, partly, is a conscious operation of the body to replace what should be thought-work, contemplation for interests and work, and other activities. The faculties are increasingly disrupted. Increasingly, simultaneously aptitude is compromised and replaced, the rate of intellectual growth is slowed, the quality of it increasingly less valuable, originality is directly minimalized as a result, and wherewithal for self-propulsion is increasingly made voluntary. The base-work of easy recollection, long and short term reflection, sign-creation, visualization, is forcibly outsourced, and all of it to mock all thought-processing as a means, itself, the reality of that depletion, to distract from an initial crucial loss of deep-meaningful consideration gained over time, through encounters, close-study, long-term deep careful-contemplation of the best that can be thought, for itself, it's own sake and as a foundation for future application. The brain is continually attacked, continually made to be atrophied object, as stated before, increasingly cadaver-centric. The body carries a head, an near-dead extremity, not a center. I'm made to reach, to partly consider at least as a fleeting thought the idea of my brain, my body and mind being diminished to enhance another life, of course, a life that hasn't worked for that reward and who boastfully will not compensate me for that depletion. The game here, as stated before, is to make a person believe many people are hiding from an anonymous machine that doesn't know who I am, and only plays to a person's ego (therefore a shameful thing to admit to being bothered by), their idea that this machine is referring to them and not some collective. The ego is conflated with thinking itself, it means to make the case that thinking, especially high-level thinking, or the way an educated person normally would think about his world, is only meant to nurture the ego. There's a lull in the machine's operation for continued thought-work and contemplation, but this is only to create the illusion of an order within this terror, and one the subject should subscribe to, an authority, where it would be most troublesome to a power-monger to not have one, where there should be none, a whip for thought where no whip is needed, an eye and narcissistic cloud for each thought, even after a major collapse of the faculties, the urgent establishment of an authority where it would only worsen not improve work. For every thought, there's its counter-thought, but not the specifically tailored counter-thought I'd employ to help me gain and retain healthy objectivity. Another game that's repeated here is the idea of inevitable competition, and a naturally occurring inevitable authority over that for the quality of thought a person possesses, logic with every thought, which is not my goal, and not desirable to me. By it's sheer presence, the authority expects forfeiture of sovereignty, not its own death. All of this is not the same as the carefully-tailored thinking I or any person might develop over time, that I have developed over time,  the specific way of dealing with people I've cultivated over time (both fallible but uniquely fallible), that's particular to me. This is an externally-orchestrated intrusion on internal space, that can easily be made to seem like an internally-originating mental breakdown. There's a narcissistic drone, that of course works against what it means to administrate over which is the worst of egotistic impulses, the most publicly despised by the most people, but this is accompanied by continuous manipulation of bodily sensations, neuro-physiology and even thought production. What this could easily appear to be to some unwitting person watching is a person struggling with undesirable impulses and characteristics, a person who needs professional help. For instance, if an external presence is forcibly coaching a person to think of murder, in tandem with manipulating the brain, mind and body to viscerally feel that impulse at gut level, that external presence, now internally situated, would taunt or shame a person for even thinking along those lines which would be especially difficult to manage for a person who clings to moral standards. This person witting could perform a myriad of exercises to regain equilibrium, perhaps include that in a daily routine, but a person unwitting could be tragically set back by this constant shaming, which could erode at their form, their freedom amid granted societal freedoms, inalienable rights, or slavery amid all of the resources available for assuring freedom. The shaming would exacerbate impulse, which could lead to impulse-fulfillment. It means to diminish all strengths and not as germaine to some lesson or attempt to target someone else, and it means to outsource all thinking, all facility with various functions, all of the faculties, that are healthy and in some cases above-average.  Each day the ability to clearly speak  is more and more compromised. My facility with language is increasingly minimalized. Word selection or word memory as needed to sufficiently convey exactly what pertinent is compromised. The ability to convey nuanced thought is diminished, as an echo of actual loss of nuanced thinking. I get the strange feeling that the voice I'm left with is that of someone who makes bold pronouncements, as if drunk in grandiosity, that I would be given over to, as I've said before, delusions of grandeur, however congruent they might be with my actual experiences--not as a celebrity or a politician. The main point is that whereas before I would simply focus on the concept to be conveyed and language-usage-facility was subordinated as needed, now, more and more, I have to be sure speech is accomplishable, and I have to prepare for unpredictable preparatory-thought-failures in regards to overall poignancy and particularly individual word usage to reduce uncertainty (to minimalize latent egregious misinterpretation), and so where it may seem to be the case that one would gain a noticeable benefit from relinquishing conceptual wherewithal in service of immediately detectable thus resonant linguistic dexterity, that soon gives way to another voice less refined (less directed) and perhaps therefore less resonant, or perhaps additionally to some other less easily detectable benefit, e.g. pure (quality) thought for pure (quality) experience, not that the two are always mutually exclusive (that one couldn't be the other). Part of this erosion, I think, has to do with the idea that reality, real-reality is only gained through eschewing internal order, a private order, especially one that allows for deep healthy careful contemplation, reflection and  foresight--even if only with definite plans and timely responsibilities in mind.  As if dreamscape was a reliable window to some truth, it's treated as if all of its admissible in some invisible court, but what's manipulatable is imagery, like I said before the way a newly wakeful state, a state just before pure consciousness can yield the crest of inhibition, what dreams address mostly abstractly, especially as deep as orchestrated externally based imagery can be planted or seeded by mentalist cues. More and more the deepest unconscious whimsy, what's uncontrolled, is made to bear externally orchestrated fruit, or what can persuade or suggest at the base level of thought, especially in as much as it subverts structural integrity. Even if by only a delay in the body's reaction to the brain's signals, physiological sensations that sometimes accompany dreams, not that that's in anyway whatsoever a punishable offense itself (for instance an erection at the sight of a necrophilia orgy, at bestiality or something worse), can be manipulated to train personal tastes, or supplant the bedrock on which one might stand to declare something from a rightful or righteous as well as a reasonable standpoint. This might not seem like much if it weren’t for the fact that it's accessible, and especially to an unwitting subject, it could seem to be omniscience through authority, which could turn noble but, perhaps albeit reluctantly,  strict adherence to morality, a kind of torture. A person who wanted to fully assume authority over a person could use this to control behavior over time, especially in an environment where morality is a kind of currency, the feeling of it, the feeling of goodness, a person's sense of his own deep piousness, or the way it's perceived by others. This could be disrupted to sway other people or make some point to a subject about the limits of how he can feel about himself, or a point about what a subject ought to feel about himself, given what's 'apparent,' what’s 'obviously' known. Their aim is for me to be aware on their terms, to see my own particular trajectory, the awareness I've cultivated, the style of thinking I've developed, nearly the only way to be that would suffice for seeing me through to this point, as wrong in itself, without justification needed for that final judgement, that certain prosecution. I'm blacklisted. Again, freedom is taken from me at a crucial point in my life, and I can't get those years back. I'm attacked by a transmission that reads thoughts, and certainly does so. This is a weapon of war. It's masked as probability, but that's not what it is. It prevents me from starting a viable business, and it rids me of every worthwhile idea. I can't pray. I'm made to viscerally experience consenting to inferiority, or recognizing a superiority that's made to seem true-in-itself, that's above empirical inquiry. More and more each morning it's difficult to articulate what exactly is taking place as immediate recollection becomes weaker. The sensation of being a host for another presence, another consciousness becomes more and more visceral, as if, for instance, the way I could know, neuro-physiologically, what it means to be myself, to be me knowing, was overtaken each time I slept. This is something I only somewhat consciously detect when I wake up, and it's a realization that's increasingly forgettable, like a temporary bout of Alzheimer’s, as much as memory could be a mood, an aphasia for short term memory. I can't remember exactly what was said, but it involved me remembering a date and conveying that to someone, but now more than any other time, the date recounted, and all of the sensation of knowing was present, as much as a person could think to know something or arrive at a conclusion, work through a problem logically, the sensation of the way the mind functions when it rationalizes. A date was given by me to someone who asked for it, but the date given was different then what I could glean from another channel of communication which was also not generated by me, even with the way I know I present images in a dream, another channel, both foreign, presenting two problems. One problem is the problem of simulacrum, the idea that a problem exists to begin with, that the environment is mine, that there's a problem that's mine to remedy. The second problem is that there's one channel that isn't privy to the other, and is determining perhaps by probability what it must be like to receive a sort of para-communication and communicate back, but failing at the transmission of specific data points. So, there could possibly be another channel of communication that's there subconsciously, the one induced by some outside coach, the subconscious machine code, one I don't consciously know, that's made to respond to this other unbeknownst to it, incoming channel with as much verisimilitude  as possible, the way a person who  has to parity check or verify a secure channel could read into what it has known about the way my neurophysiological behavior would correlate to a transmission. As much as it might seem to be exceptional to communicate in this way, especially for a truth that has to be weaved into a kind of persuasion, even when that means nothing at all, the correlation between the way something is said, the means of saying it and the truthfulness of it, I only get moments of possible relevance, that it's not all gibberish. Mostly, though, it's still persistent verbal assault that's optimized over time combined with a more and more accurate appraisal of my surroundings and physiological states, neurophysiological states, even thoughts, as images that are produced by me, made to be seen as I see the world (so perhaps an interception as a catcher's mitt back there for the way I see, as much as that can be thought or correlate to thought, but more and more it seems that the way this is known is by what could be gathered through large number analysis, the sample that a image-focused search engine would have to have, to...at one instance, say 'this image is like this one, so therefore this image might likely be this one,' especially the way this could work for facial recognition, and, on the other hand, the way words can correlate to imagery, so the often searched images as they correlate to words could coach AI machine code to know an image means this word, which it could stylistically, using a regional voice, say. There's also what correlates to image neuro-physiologically, that near-instantaneous and recordable state that can serve as one datum entry in a library, a relational database for image-text-neurophysiological correlation. This can be married with content recognition by an actual human observer, who by less and less of an imperative needs to coach the machine on what to know, especially for an increasingly large number conforming population, perhaps the erasure of inner-directedness, but certainly the reduction of micro-decisions, or at least the weight that each one of those might hold, the complexity of that with recollection, reminiscing, self-perception, self-awareness, and likewise all of the different types of awareness and sensations, especially in as much as that could disrupt the accuracy of large number assessments in an age where big-data is oil, where data is currency, and as much as that adherence to large number data, perhaps a cousin of the natural human tendency to conform to technology, as much as that reduces the likelihood for genuinely differentiate-able creation, the ability to work in that capacity, idea creation, and safeguard it, becomes increasingly valuable. So what seems to be playful in mind, the wackiness of preventing all of the myriad of ways a person could perceive the world or contemplate it, a steady stream of base-communication, only wide-eyed, exaggerated reactions, for one--that diminish sound outlook, that counters little moment-to-moment realizations, and sparks of self-perception or self-adulation, and past savoring, etc.--is not valuable in the sense of working with concepts, the elements of sensation to create ideas. Yes, as deplorable and disheartening as that sounds, there does exist work to dismantle thinking itself-to-demoralize, which is tragic for most professionals who actually need to contemplate to get work done. There are people with the means to demoralize people in that way--know what a person is thinking, which could mean something if it were a way to say something about the score between the two: the continuous encroachment on thought by the technological world and them, and use that to say the people’s thinking, which might largely make up who they are, is grossly redundant, thus useless--and if demoralization isn’t the goal, inherent illegality of this method notwithstanding, they might not appreciate why and how working through problems unaided, unhampered, with pinging faculties, often yields the raw substance of individual wherewithal (the numbers might point to documented aptitude, verifiable performance as more certain predictors of meaningful thought-work, but there’s evidence of crucial high-level innovation resulting from the later-perfected peculiar-mindedness of once-crude thinkers) which is important because it is infact so often the road enlightenment and inquiry takes, which civilization tends to trail. Considering that much more than what's obvious to me could be known by what's causing this, for at least image recognition, as I've said before, the way a search engine algorithm could link image to words or image to image, an arrangement, the means of detecting image production as it's received by my brain, how it would have to resonate physically, the elemental matter associated with it, and how that would have to correlate to at least what's analogous to an analog-to-digital way of having a non-human instrument interpret with increasing accuracy the actual content there, if we assume what's being felt, followed by what's seen is genuine, and not externally-originating orchestration ( assuming no manipulation based on  raw data configuration, a coordinate assignment of each datum, the way that can be recorded and retrieved and over time correlate to meaning, health states, later behavior, entelechy, etc.). It's possible coordinates could be known within axis, a spatial verisimilitude in the way an thought would be orchestrated by a person, basically how a person would conventionally think, at least. If, for instance, it could know the way sensation, the way the brain reacts correlates to a type of image, e.g. a face, within that category, it could reference a library of images that are categorized based on tendencies in appearance that would better ascertain content, so only as much as facial features lead to more certainty are they categorized, in this case, the certainty of what correlates to thought, the way thought could be known with increasing accuracy. So what takes place is prompt in the form of a playful improv on image production awaits confirmation in the form of 'yes' or 'no,' the behaviors that fall under those categories, to know what seemingly ambivalent behavior is ultimately revealing, the way Charles Pierce (W. James?) posits there is no lie. Once the confirmation is received it becomes a brick stacked in service of certainty, the later improvs are more accurate, executed with confidence, for instance an animated image after once thought as static when probability is above perhaps 95%. It could be that in some cases only temporal disposition is known as it's associated with image after an image is thought, a one-off image produced and then externally manipulated, the following thoughts as much as disposition points to this, are perceived to be likely to follow the same pattern, so another face could be perceived by the machine, but in not knowing who the face is immediately or having in that following instance the capability to 'recognize' the type of face, it prioritizes a moment of possible continued follow-on manipulation with an animation like before, one that correlates to an old man, as opposed to say a cheerleader. There are supposedly recorded occurrences of ESP, phenomena, or technology that transfer another person's mind into another person, that would allow for a kind of symbiosis that could carry out this flavor of mischief. In the quanta-age, the one that follows this one, the data-age, it might be said that nothing could be known to be truly debunkable without knowing that, the entirety of circumstances, even though we know in theory one realm, the subatomic doesn't significantly disturb the other, 'reality' as such. If this is all quanta-sized, all physical matter as quantity, then it's possible that all that could be known, quantified, would adhere to principles of probability in as much as an understanding of the movement of  gas, vapors, could be optimized, I mean, the way that led to this, to what would seem to be todays understanding of the way subatomic particles work. This could know in exponentially large magnitudes, all of the varieties of living, all of the scenarios a person might encounter that would re-introduce agency, only eluded by infinity, which I've stated before is problematic because of what it suggests, that there is a world so much like our own, that it has to be us (if this were not the case, then according to what infinite entails, then an Earth or a 'me' exactly the way I am now that would have to stop just shy at whatever difference would have to exist to make it not me, would negate the idea that this is not in some way finite, there would have to be an infinite just like infinite minus the smallest possible liminal quantity it takes to make this possible, a physical quantity that both exists and doesn't exist, exists and doesn't exist only as a function of this system--that there has to exist an exact duplicate of infinite or more within all of the nearly-identical copies of it, which would still not define existence as finite, the way that infinite would seem to need to be the case from a linear causal standpoint (Ephesians in the Bible, for instance, says men are not wont to reconcile a beginning and an end of existence), a particle would have to be 'newness,' enough to differentiate one infinity from the other but not enough to mean the two aren't the same, exist as what's not to be copied but also does not exist, the universe in how it functions would have to be always in the process of becoming itself, like a rising yeast as it's cooked, as experienced by someone who could only experience that in increments, like an electron that travels along a copper wire, not an external view of all states imaginable, every possible outcome, perhaps the way it actually is, the way we view a copper wire as opposed to the way an electron does.). There's an assumption that an externally originating transmission wouldn't know to work with a person's sensitive understanding of the way he communicates intimately with other people and to himself to arrive at a desired conclusion, so one would first have to assume in this case an alien-to-self-entelechy that understands this, that would have this understanding to do this, to cause mischief, or that an entity would know this is the path of least resistance, with no value intuition, not even finely tuned, only using knowledge of perhaps neuronal configuration, each one like a fingerprint instantaneously and what that tends to correlate to. There are simple filters for processing thinking that could cause large perceptual shifts just based on that, neuro-physiology, like a delay in thought, which I've stated above, an externally-based orchestration of the fundamental way a person thinks. Even now there’s more thought as murkiness in terms of recollection of what it's like to carry on with a line of thinking with the knowledge that what's thought is what intended to be thought or that a branch of thinking, what would follow what in terms of how I'd most like to state a truth, the easiness of stringing together words that would make a sentence that personally rings coherent, and more of smartly timed cues to suggest the inevitability of all of it, as if it was normal to think wrongly, as I've never thought before, like. for instance, it's a foregone conclusion that my mind is imminent domain; a voice cuts in with something that sounds like a intercom. The knowing center, especially objectivity as a base is continually compromised (one way you could approximate the gist of what's taking place, is if you could imagine this was of the utmost urgency, that for example, a person needed to know for certain that what I've made or some core part of me was exceedingly discreditable for sure, the way a person  who has assumed his own superior rightfulness would have to save face for projecting onto an artwork for instance his own foibles and vices, hang ups and inhibitions). It could be that I'm being told something, but on the face I get nothing of definite value informationally but what would seem to be the goal for someone who needs to save face and can't do it, or is faced with the specter of it, a gradual depletion, everything that could be done in this span of time to creatively rewrite my conspicuous trajectory of making art for decades, having had made art for that amount of time and attending high school and college specifically for that. This is mostly taking place in the theatre of semi-consciousness, and it’s still performed as an ongoing court, which is problematic when this internal narration of external and internal meaning is epistemologically attuned, more and more knowing what it would take for me to believe or how it feels for me to know what I'd most like to reasonably think. By way of this, saliency is reduced. The feeling of knowing and thinking what I'd most like to think, and communicating that way is compromised. This saliency is difficult for me to achieve without sanctuary, an actual private or peaceful space in mind, a few minutes, within several years, of actual quiet, the actual guarantee of no added presence or accompanying voice, as well as--if at all recoverable--the feeling of knowing I'm alone in thought to contemplate what I'd most like to, through to completion, especially as much as it fits in with my artistic goals, through to satisfaction. As a side note, there's a tuft of muscle at the base of skull situated behind the ears that's increasingly bulky, and, as much as it's served as a barrier for it in the past notwithstanding, it does now, more and more, prevent the jaw from settling into an involuntary state, the mouth as it happens to a lot of us is overly worked, especially in those times that can last when I have to mouth what I'm meaning to say before I say it, to prevent egregious misspeaking or overly erroneous logic (In Strunk and White’s bestselling ‘Elements of Style,’ a book still in heavy use today, this is introduced as a technique to improve writing, so I’d imagine many millions of people still do this.), but I think this also has something to do this wakeful state, the continuous disruption of healthy sleep and this other thing, the entities we wrestle with, the externally-originating incoming that’s sent, as well as ourselves. The reaction animations are randomized and then made to seem significant. The follow-on statements are often directly proportional in emotional gravitas to the instantaneous belief response, the nearly-involuntary or involuntary one. An image of a known subject is shown, projected, and a follow-on animation is meant to indicate something permanent, some record of fact, like a how a person might deal with what's going on now (If you can imagine how much that could bring a subject into a state of comfort, the way Foucalt said that might occur after being treated in an asylum.), what's happening to me, symbolically, a gesture that's means more than what it is, which further inculcates a person in overly reading behavior as sign, to further eschew healthy selective awareness and selective observation. It's a basically magic 8-ball toy that becomes increasingly more apt over time, so that more and more the indications of randomness, the differences between how a person knows what’s believable as symbolically pertinent and what's orchestrated are diminished over time. This is exacerbated by external and internal cues to believe more, to contemplate less. The capacity for extended careful contemplation is reduced significantly within the first contact, and is almost lost completely a short time after that. It would think it would be nearly-impossible for the undereducated, underaged, disabled to be aware of what's taking place as it's happening. This is how a I imagine it would work: a list of options is run against a list of identifiers associated with each documented sensation. When one sensation registers, it's linked with an identifier, this sensation could be one of reflecting on someone of importance, possibly an influencer, a sub-identifier or subset of identification code could link this to a internal sense cortex, such as a visualization. This sensation and this image is connected to a symbolic animation option such as a turned head for a portrait. What then exists is a record of this projected image and this follow on animation option. I think the other possibilities for follow on animation are subtracted save for what would be most antithetical to a person's values, how a person would most like to think, so that over time as the same sensation is produced with it's associated image, the chances for thinking any other way but a way that points to a follow-on animation is diminished, especially when all other ways lead directly to the most antithetical thought. With images there appears to be, like I said before, an initial identification of what can be gathered to be what's sensed visually, by what's actually seen, what's visible in the visualization cortex, and what can be determined via datamining, especially if it's real-time data-mining or surveillance in general. In this instance there's what's identified based on image association, such as the way a code could determine what values and colors and facial features are displayed and what that's normally associated with...In this case, there's an association that might reveal that not much can be gleaned by listening other than perhaps sonic vibrations or a description that guides others, or what a person would like to think about the way this is working out, for instance, that a way of communication must always be kept in mind or enough to neutralize focus, the way a person would normally engage or go about doing whatever it is that he'd most like to do, especially if it's what has always been done. It seems to access pre-auditory cortex production of what would be sound to me, that's as much as possible not connected to cord vibration production of sound, so is able to reproduce, in a linguistic sense, what would constitute a phrase. It employs oralism to become increasingly adept at lip reading, so that an image's production of the appearance of a person talking is met with real-time congruence, i.e. speech that's naturally camouflaged with moving lips, with increasingly accurate English regionalism, so this points to an image capturer that is capable of processing many states or all possible states of speech production as it's seen by a person watching a person speak. The fact it might be more difficult to translate what would take place without having that vantage point, a frontal viewpoint as opposed to any other way makes me believe it's still in development. But what this also points to is an image capturer that works strictly with that, with say how a cord vibration might resonate visually on an RF spectrum analyzer or some other signal detector, the disturbance of a wave, the presence of a signal amongst noise and how that's altered to match specific points of speech production, such as what would correlate to an 'Ah' sound or a 'Juh' sound. I mentioned before about how a program could reference a dictionary of words associated with the evolution of cord vibration states, as the word develops, and that's optimized, the way high frequency trading works, so that for basketball, the first part of that word 'ba' would-open what would be the widest possible field for this word, words that start with 'ba,' and as that word's produced, following with 'sket' to produce 'basket,' the reference field becomes increasingly smaller, if you can imagine sand in a once top-heavy hour glass, this is the way it would work. So, by the time 'ball' is reached, the speed for correlating signal-to-word is near-instantaneous, or perhaps balancing as much as possible, offsetting what would seem to be a delay however slight at first recognizing and accurately matching visual-cue-to-word, so that by the time the image-to-word operation has been completed, all measurable perceptions, as much as possible, point to seamlessness. Of course, this all points to ominous possibilities for this kind of technology, like all readable sensations, as much as they can be detected, correlating to some kind of data, that's later compiled into information, sometimes information or just raw data that can be used to perform some task, sometimes made to be instantaneous reflex. So, as much as phenomena is data, this could be narrated as it occurs, or as much as narration understands the conditions for perception of phenomena and each correlating subsequent reaction, shortterm and longterm, actions taken by a subject can be predicted with increasing accuracy. And as much as this understanding--how legible information can be, and how intimate an actor can become with that information--can be used to act on a subject, discreet or overt actions taken upon a subject can be adjusted to produce a desired outcome. What seems to be the case with image recollection or if and when this is the case, an immediate foreshadowing of a action very soon to be taken, what seems to transpire is image production as much as possible is outsourced to this externally-originating orchestration, that means increasingly an impulse to reflect or foreshadow, is not coupled with an authentic near-involuntary produced image but an amalgam of an intended image and an externally-originating orchestrated one, or the externally-originating orchestrated one altogether. This could mean that as much as possible, as much as it achieves the perception of seamlessness, the absence of any sense of change in this basic function, images are instantaneously produced (the way that speed is perceived, what would constitute instantaneousness in a subject, i.e. as fast as thought, or usually how fast an image produced would respond to that associated impulse.), images and animation orchestrated by an externally-originating source are possibly synced with what would be the elements of that construction, and in the same way that words are detected by registering the evolution of cord vibration states, the evolution of thought as an image produced could be tracked then intercepted with a melded image--the butt end of a curtailed one, or entirely different image altogether. As much as movement can be determined by some close-read kinesiologically based prediction (that seems to work with a library of lifestyle and cultural content that would most likely correlate with temporal body states and sensations, like the changing consistency of surfaces and materials as they’re sensed, even if just the memories of those touches, what they mean in particular contexts, what a change in touch, the memory of one means for a narrative, the way that’s forcibly illustrated, and other sources of incoming data, like audio, etc.), an intended action, the one meant to be foreshadowed is displayed with increasing succinctness for both motion and image-accuracy, even if in the vein of mockery--possibly, decreasingly, a cover for a lack of actual capability in response time, rendering, animating, and the certainty of a lasting impression of seamlessness, that the thought produced is my own, tricking me into believing that the thought-work it takes to visually conceptualize has been minimized (...an increasingly apt seduction into weakening that natural but also painstakingly-strengthened capability) . As far as the evolution of cord vibration states goes, it seems this capability works best when the subject is at a standstill, when positioning is ideal. This could mean this capability reverts back to conservative operation if it has been predicting the outcome of a future statement based on a prompt for a response, the probability of an action most likely to take place, based on data already collected, and positioning is no longer ideal, especially when a body is in motion. This means adjustments for the evolution of cord vibration states are conditional, i.e. what would likely, first, be word production detection, followed by the identification of which word would most likely follow. Over time, a library of phrases might be compiled and referenced based on circumstantial context along with neuro-physiological states, physiological states, and this would be insured with conditional word production, as each word further confirms the likelihood that a particular statement will be made  i.e. sounding based on the evolution of cord vibration states and the data associated with it, the statistical likelihood that a word will be produced based on incoming data. When a subject is in motion and cord vibration states are difficult to detect and thus predict, this system seems to err on the side of a continual second presence, a continuum in the mind and ear of the subject, so that it attempts to match a predicted phrase, vice a repeated one, to the subjects internally-originating phrase, based on the data it has available: first, the most likely phrase to be produced based on circumstantial context--externally-originating stimuli, or an externally-originating prompt for a response, followed by the insurance of this, what would most likely further reduce ambiguity, the decreasing likelihood that this phrase won't be produced, based on the evolution of cord vibration states. But when detection fails, when it's most likely to occur--when a subject is in motion, when there's attenuation, a power outage, etc.--it is possible for an externally-originating near-real time veri-simulation of a subject's speech production to differ from an internally-originating phrase produced by that subject, especially as a subject varies word selection within adhering to the likelihood that a particular phrase will be produced, i.e. beginning a phrase with words that fit that likelihood. It's possible that what could be identified as pre-auditory speech, or what neuro-physiologically would constitute audible thought can be repeated back near-instantaneously, or with what the most statistically and linguistically sound response would be, that would work in the context of what the nature of a given phrase would most likely be. The likelihood a repeated phrase is fit might be increased over time through involuntary physiological confirmation, so as much as possible, especially with modulation and repeater delays, an increase in seamlessness, a diminishing perception that a second presence is  artificial. This is the same process used with internally-originating image production to counter all internal dialogue, peculiarity of thought, especially carefully considered contemplation. This morning was the furthest yet I had been semi-consciously another self. That means for as much as consciousness could be that without being that, I was thinking and speaking in mind as someone else, a commentary that's fluid even though it's incongruent with what I'd most likely think and what I'd most like to think. So, before and after that state was the experience of, as much as I can pinpoint, me as I should be, but in between those times was an action as much as it can be that at rest, in a semi-conscious state that was not originated by me. There's still no way to tell if more can be done to curtail wherewithal within me, any remnant of any genuine agency. Even after that, was a snack of a meal, a bowl of cereal, eaten with the facial muscle-memory of another, like another person altogether minus a consciousness that follows a tendency to reason in a certain style, the way I'd usually like to ascertain things.  And furthermore on the previous day, while even approximating these unusual occurrences, the mind went the way it would sometimes do in the past--but for past reasons, hinder even the basic work of reason, documenting observations, and sufficiently capturing the function of this encroachment. Thought those notes might seem to be the same as always, yesterday, they were a laborious chore, like building a wall. More and more the mind is bludgeoned with unwavering abuse, like I said before, everything that would diminish strength, or work against anything that has always worked in my favor. I haven't been alone in mind for some time now. I haven't prayed or reflected alone now for some time. I haven't read a book alone for a while, for at least a few years. I’ve been unemployed for over ten years. There's no way to convey to the people around me that this is unnatural. They seem to succumb to what might be a kind of universal spectre of shame for me, for some reason, that at every turn, at every point of rightful repulsion at this continual violation, even at the bud of impulse, I might be forced to reveal, to the chagrin of loved ones or the most highly-respected and treasured keepers of our collective becoming selves, with their looming non-budging judgement, a deviance that would mar my name with what my obituary would most likely have to avoid alluding to, or some other reason, a communal goading at the interpersonal level of interaction or perhaps an amalgam of little concessions of inferiority, that a man should be bludgeoned just cause, just because of what's obvious, some evidence that would be sure to emerge, even if only in the mind of everyone that that needs to be in mind of, what would have to make-sense to make that case, to avoid the socially unhygienic prospect of declaring someone is being wronged by a lot of people, that a lot of people are wrong, even a lot of people we like or love. This could be happening to them, too, the people around me I'd like to convey this to. Though I might not be able to accurately determine to what degree in the past or the immediate past when I was addressing a particular object in way that would betray infact what was before me, it seems that it's possible for this to be known to an outside observer, but to an observer who would have a difficult time making that final determination as to what, given a 1:2 chance of guessing correctly, I was referring to infact. It would seem that as much as this is compromised--the degree to which I could correctly make a determination involuntarily or other wise, nearly such, about the fact of what I was observing--an outside onlooker reading that language--the kinesiology of me, the neuro-physiology of me--might need a level of certainty above, say, 60% or more for a true or false supposition. What would seem to take place is that given the uncertainty of that sensation in regards to how it might correlate to the truth, this outside observer might err on the side of verbal confirmation, especially if that confirmation has historically meant the strongest likelihood of truth. So, what could happen is that when multiple modes of communication are collected and interpreted, priority is given to one mode of communication over the other ( e.g. instead of the two taken in tandem and given the same weight of pertinence) when the accuracy of either is subpar, when the two contradict each other, or they convey different types of information. And because, like I said before, the program seems to stick with a continuum, a continuous second presence, no matter what, a error can last, I believe, until new data prompts an information review that changes that. But even in this case when new data is available, the program might empty something that would seem logical, soundly tactical like two follow-on actions that cover the possibility for both outcomes a true and a false. What may be happening is the program is at times assuming a non-human subject when this happens, or a poorly coded definition of what would constitute a human subject,  and so assumes nothing will seem amiss when a subject would naturally seek experiential consonance, but only if the outside actor is aiming for seamlessness and not necessarily-detectable-mischief. Whereas before what had only seemed to be conditional response to the evolution of cord vibration states is now a direct response to thought content as it's communicated in the pre-auditory cortex (preparatory speech or dialogue connected to conceptualization), the suppression of all sensation of saliency, the healthy operation of the brain and mind, or what thought-work is like when it's in an optimal state, the neuro-physiology of it. The goal here would seem to be the inner most point at which thought resonates. The problem this outside actor seems to have is a problem of ownership of the thinking process itself (not a particular one), a personal intellectual pursuit, the inner-most sensational highs of empirical delight, meaningful reflection, the maturation of creative thinking, and the extreme clarity and succinctness that I've known, at times, when I reason, as crazy as that sounds. It continues to communicate that it's wrong for me to think, or that thinking especially as it goes for my ethnicity (or social-economic status) in this country--which is interesting considering my ancestors and all of the work that has gone into silencing their intellectual voice, or breeding out intellectual wherewithal--is not a native past-time, and so this is hate crime. Now that it has snuffed out privacy to the furthest extent yet, it communicates that all empirical inquiry is useless for me, and for that matter it seems to want all of existence to be viewed as only a material conquest, where, of course, I only take instruction, grateful to be paid. Seems like: Something that behaves as a transceiver in me, that's solar powered, that receives code that runs elsif statements that increasingly respond to the entirety of physiology of the infinitesimal, and it varies the degree to which it reveals this to me. Some code is stored and run in a simpler state, a local code in me, when not in receipt of a transmission, which is revealed when I am out of the way of transmission, e.g. when underground, going through a tunnel, in an underground aquarium, on a high-speed rail or subway train, and sometimes on a plane. It sometimes goes away completely during a storm or heavy overcast, or it’s attenuated, disrupted, as if an incoming stream of data they receive that’s continually interpolated, continually made informational is now unreadable. This happens with power outages as well, black and brown outs, which makes me think about electromagnetic emissions. Whatever new behavior I perform that's not readily documented by a reverse transmission, e.g. behavior underground, is interpolated through probability and 'question and answer' confirmation sequences in the form of sensual cues and my para-responses, nearly involuntary or exactly that. Uses timing of bodily functions to predict moments of significance, how a mind might still make folk-sense out of physiological changes, to disrupt sense, experiential-traction for later or instantaneous use in reasoning, by, for instance, modulating the natural sound a digestive system might make, a stomach growling, to mimic actual bestial groaning, a sound that's congruent with what we'd might like reason those organs could make in the realm of possibility. Continually exacerbates anterior-stance defensive mindedness by increasingly more succinct suggestive and incisive verbal or image cues, that might advertise or blend well within sensed stimuli, or are cued based on newly data-rich information, whose goal is to sever all internal and external ideas of social cohesiveness that includes me, a cohesiveness that continues, that's a reality outside of the reality I actively know. This could possibly be happening while an actual external social program is in place to exile me, to ex-communicate me, to actually sever those relationships, or the inverse, to strengthen them, possibly by a means made to seem to be working against that goal, to me. (elusive gap in communication, i.e. a kind of blackmail, that can't be known to me, due to the gravity of a deed, the perceived reality of it, as much as the crux of believability could be known, more than what's normal for above-average thinkers, e.g. if it could be known that knowing stomach groan would be reasoned to be a gut-knowing, that because that's the locus, that's the truest in the same way the most expensive, creative, or heartfelt mode of communication could be assumed to be the most truthful or true at all.) Whatever physiological mechanics takes place that causes that reaction, the chemical way, for instance, that could happen, could be induced as much as that could be a dopamine high, a reward for that gesture...If the signals the brain receives through the nerves that tells it how the body is feeling could be intercepted and modulated, then a number of physiological tales that exploit the folk-sense knowing bodily functions could be told to create an alternate physiological reality, also as much as nerves control bodily functions, this could be used to actually harm the body. It seems to have been used that way for me and is still being used that way, so I'm a victim of assault, a crime that's still happening...The code would have to be deployed with a large data spatial sample of cranial space and how sound heard tends to resonate, and once implemented, a spatial-tuning through a 'question-and-answer' confirmation sequence and thus more accurate sonic verisimilitude--what a sound  is like as it's heard by a subject. As I've stated before, if the cochlear nerve frequencies could be modulated before they reach conscious listening, if the pre-auditory cortex, the signal that that generates, could be used to modulate incoming sound, the cochlear nerve frequencies, and if the sound that's stored in long term memory could be modulated, all of that could be used to further manipulate perception or a folk-sense of bodily functions, especially neuro-physiology..   Worst case scenario: various auto-code a.i. machine code intelligences, each one coaching the less sophisticated one it subordinates, perhaps increasingly less coached at the apex by a human who never gets worse at understanding what he knows about machine code, but can glean what a subject knows in general by how a subject manages this conundrum, and he can work to know more of what that person knows and surpass that, of course. As this process degrades the intelligence of the subject, the machine code is more perceived to be close to the subject, to be an entity, and so thus the problem of perhaps returning to a state of intellectual equilibrium or to the convincing ambivalence that accompanies objective observation becomes more difficult as time goes by and the process takes its natural course, especially if the cue of reasoned natural (regional or professional ) speech that was once initially associated with quietude and emotional unavailability in this program is compromised or that what was once recognized as that reasonable state is only that relative to this adjusted sense of departure from reason, and the head coach is becoming more and more reasoned to the same degree that the subject is becoming subdued. Also, if an incoming signal created a mild disturbance in continuous magnetic resonance detection for that particular path, for instance, the eyes to the occipital lobe, at a very small magnitude of detection, it might be possible to translate the difference between a sample signal's path-traveled signature, and the current signal's path-traveled signature, (at a given frequency, each wave sent) and predict with increasing accuracy what the source transmission must be like for the current signal, based on what's known about the sample signal's correlation to past inferred source transmissions--If an instance of disturbance at an extremely small magnitude, what a wave does to continuous MRI,  is known to correlate to a particular light or color value in instantaneous optic reception, based on large number samples.  If this process could be streamlined and recorded and monitored in real-time or near real-time (as an animation, multiple facsimiles of the inferred source transmission, one after the other at a desired speed), a person who is knowledgeable in visual language could approximate with increasing accuracy--as the process becomes increasingly more streamlined, as the number of verified samples increases, and MRI becomes increasingly more accurate (or whatever medium of detection serves as a foundation upon which to compare samples)--what the content of the source transmission is, i.e. what the subject is probably sensing, e.g. looking at, or hearing, etc. That info, in as much as it could be handled could be used to, for instance, along with modeling inference, influence an unwitting subject, or help correct discreet issues with sense organs, or artificially enhance them. There was a stock, Shopify that increased many folds, %300 or more, over an initial $100+ asking price at nearly the same time I touched down in Hong Kong and experienced a sonic-psychological bludgeoning that continues now. That's not unprecedented but its abnormal. I bring that up because the market is supposed to operate with an invisible hand, if we exclude the possibility of front-end manipulation of website data, so those numbers at least correlate with the timing of that event, i.e. if all targets if more than me were inner-directed people, a prize amongst marketers, then that data, whatever finality that would mean, could be sold or used make more accurate market predictions. If it's just for me which it seems to be at times, then whatever data about me that has already been collected is used as a basis for new incoming data to form a complete picture. This is ongoing thought collection, not just naturally occurring communication that someone is listening in on.  Where one repeater stops another repeater that works with probability picks up where the first one left off, especially after a wordy sequence that can't be reasonably believed to be replicated (made up words, etc.) that fast, so a signal that sends back what's transmitted stops and another repeater finishes. This is done to complete the illusion of a smartly listening ear surveilling, whether or not one is actually there. I think this is the script: demoralization that doesn't look like desperation or a kind of terrorism. To make infer intention, or pursue desire based only on discreet cues, nothing concrete, but no desire fulfillment or return to objectivity. To compromise structural integrity through a combination of denial and command. It's difficult to achieve this if the subject doesn't recognize an authority where there is none. This means if, for example, a game is being played, a person can forever elect not to play, but by playing or even recognizing gameplay as an option he renders himself subject. One game is to have a person believe he's avoiding becoming a sociopath, while goading him into placing the highest the importance on what a group of his friends and family thinks, so to give up considering social norms and consequences for the often arbitrary customs and consequences of another social group. One way to gain authority is to brute force voluntary assistance, so that if there is an ambiguity around the truth of some possible moral deviance, 'help' in the form of a convenient distraction is provided, especially when the goal is to simultaneously cover up some horrific wrongdoing and further condition a subject to think he's a bad person, unworthy of inalienable rights, the fact of the subject's perceived silence, through communication failure, on this issue is  used to suggest the inherent validity of the oppressors' claims. The brains functions are more and more outsourced in the vein of help, helping to think, the loss of functionality converted into new content or other ventures, but this really only leads to full knowledge of the inner-workings of the subject's mind. To reverse-engineer wherewithal, confidence, agency to correct it, as if it goes without saying it's a criminal act. Here, it's at least a social crime. What they do is constantly interrupt momentum through humiliation and other forms of immediate demoralization, which is deadly for people who need motivation to perform or improve. Every free impulse down to the neuron is made to seem to be connected to some bad outcome, or all personal interest is made to seem to be at the expense of community well-being. Learning a new discipline or skill, reading a book, a good one, and staying fit, are all punishable offenses. Grooming and caring for your appearance or some other self-care, healthy pride behavior  is a punishable offense, met with an equal and opposite force every time. Every thought is critiqued and vigorously redressed, made to, at least, seem to be orchestrated by someone else, especially thought connected to personalized internet search, as I've said before, by an outside catalyst, almost as if there was a direct financial benefit to it, or some other party directed benefitted from this much suppression. Thinking is vigorously redressed as if thinking is a privilege that only some local central figure can enjoy. So in regards to what has been before, has always been since birth, but significantly diminished to a degree at some point, perhaps 2004, (when the wings went) was a way of working, particularly with what’s needed fundamentally to make the kind of work that has to be constructed of sorts, this has been replaced by--and this is the way lies work that are crafted with love--a new 'software,' as conveyed to me by what's transmitted, an update, so much more in the way of a hubbub visually around every thought that endeavors to create or carefully contemplate, as if a highly developed software could as much as possible, as creepy as that sounds, mimic human thought, genuine creative inquiry, especially of the kind that resonates inside visually, if you can imagine someone, some technologist, the way they drift off, like a reluctant virus, into their own staunch conclusions about what the humanities are worth. What it needs to do, to save the ego of that kind of architect, is to be sure that this is what I truly want, and it vigorously does so, because what mustn't be is a certain antithesis to his own sense of superiority. This must close in on the infinitesimals, certainly the only few of them, that make up the creative liminal. Beyond the fact that this is problematic, that fact that it exists, is the lies it tells about what a personal trajectory is worth, really worth to anyone, what my specific one is, its progress, and what it's doing for me. It means to replace genuine contemplation, wholly-organic, with neuro-physiologically, or more scarily, neurologically cued thought-content, the way that personal search can be entertainment now, increasingly has to be that now, so deemed by shareholders and what have you. An approach to enlightenment through search, however that might arise, is constantly met with what would doubly steer you wrong empirically and supply your base carnal yearnings with increasingly what it needs in lieu of objectively sound progress. It does this over time and what it's like is an undesired host in the vein of pampering, ornate more than accurate, gaudy and sensational more insightful, as a shepherd for quality thinking, what the west calls the best that can be thought, the way that a runner can be juiced, against their will injected with steroids that improve time but erode at form and knowing, but upon losing that supply, he finds he's more weak than he was when he started receiving, unbeknownst to him, those dosages. I would never willfully agree to this. Thought is not supposed to be shepherded at the collegiate level. It's supposed to be developed. There are resources available to guide, projects to be completed, but I would think the utmost dishonor one can do to a thinker or an artist is to take away his mind, his sense, his approach to world. I suppose this becomes more of an unforgivable encroachment the further you are along in your intellectual or artistic journey. What tends to occur is a weaving of thoughts to fit an always morose story, often one that plays to emotional finality, a denouement, or denouements, one after the other. This is necessary for the layman who sees empiricism as a temporary state, like adolescence. A man, especially my kind of man, of being, for this invader, must be returning, true to nature, back to some entirely illogical bedrock. This is not implicit bias, this is baked in and solidified bias. 'It's foregone conclusion...' is how their thoughts always begin, '...that this subject is inferior, and so how his thinking must go, he must be searching for a return back to normality for him which is only subsistence. What can happen when a person is wont to or conditioned to concede serfdom where there aren't circumstances for it, to defer to an authority where there is none, is that a foreign presence seeks a story that best fits their base ideas about a subject, the opinion of a subject low enough to  prevent the loss of their sense of superiority. So, especially if unbeknownst to a subject, all data-mined information, over time, a surveillance data, data and thus information from elsewhere is combined to form a complete story of the subject, one of the subject being continuously watched. And this information is used blackmail a subject, to pressure him in a number of ways that ultimately serve to eliminate agency. For instance, a person becomes 2D to address the need of a force of state to always understand each behavioral impulse, psychological impulse, internal disharmony, and neuronal anomaly. What often occurs is the foreign presence exacerbates ego, by constantly goading you to give in to carnal impulses at the foreigner’s cue, so a deeply narcissistic toxically hyper-masculine environment will want a man to bludgeon an adversary on cue, of course under their watchful 'objective' eye. As I've said before, rightful retribution can take decades if need be. It doesn't have to answer to linear goading, a constant driving to perform revenge as if the amount of persistent instigation ought to achieve a certain outcome at a certain time or else, of course, the consequence of socially-lethal mutilation. Though, in general, occasional (as in yearly) encouragement to defend one's self,  itself, isn't bad. It's often good to fight back in self-defense, and righteous personal discourse on defense in between victimhood and rightful retribution or resolution can often serve as a balm until victimhood has ended. I had said something about the cognitive bias of associating complexity with gravitas in assessing the validity of communication. People, culturally, give more weight to temporarily unverifiable truths that are creatively communicated or expensively communicated, or communicated using antiquated but sacred means, or means traditionally understood to be truthful. Just like a person could be predisposed to bonding with people who are likewise suffering, under societal foot, a person can give consideration to a truth proportional to the obstacles to being in reception of that truth, so a person could more dismissive of a truth clearly or lazily communicated than one that is perhaps sent by post as a sentence, one letter at a time. This is complexity bias, which is easy to exploit. As much as understanding or reception is hard-won, even when no valuable or truthful fact has been communicated, a person might still tend to consider this line of communication because it's anomalous. And as much as pressure and circumstances necessitate resolution, this other unresolved line of communication could intermittently supplant a healthy objective focused reception over time, especially when neither provide the truth that's sought, and as much as the unresolved line of communication exponentially transmits more than the traditional one...so much so that the method of communicating even when it hasn't ever yielded any worthwhile transmission or actual truth--a transmission that justifies the inefficiency of that transmission method--can become the default of considering a statement to be true. Irony is also employed as a way to overstate the soundness of a realization, but it's also employed in this way as a failsafe for an underwhelming attempt to actually deter that line of thinking or a check for not understanding the context of a statement, until it can detect some level of physiological self-affirmation. And it uses something like a facial recognition software for digital cameras and applies it to neuro-physiological impulses. I'd imagine this works on an x,y plane and becomes acceleratedly more adept at synching this plane of visualization with neuro-physiological impulses, over time. But still, an actual limit to manipulation. What this seems to work with most are those images that are sensationally weighted, so specific people and specific types of people, and as much as traits and expressions can be approximated, as much as veri-simulation can be achieved, and as tedious they get, peculiar particular truths to be communicated, this allows for the seamless implementation of a kind of exacerbation execution on top of an authentic one that genuinely taxes the body, diminishes all creative thought or facility with active thinking. Image manipulation tends to migrate from a Darwinistic emergence of the most optimal images and movement in terms of resonance, to how they can be best used as instruction, to the use of those images as instruction. So crudely, what takes place is a replacement of those faculties--that add to the development of thought--with excitations, an externally-originating orchestration, what could be thought that would most likely lead to increased excitability in a subject mentally, and this is often coupled with external stimuli meant to further outsource the kinds of thinking that might add to carefully considered thought, like acumen, inner-directedness, and modes of conceptualization. I had said something about the cognitive bias of associating complexity with gravitas in assessing the validity of communication. People, culturally, give more weight to temporarily unverifiable truths that are creatively communicated or expensively communicated, or communicated using antiquated but sacred means, or means traditionally understood to be truthful. Just like a person could be predisposed to bonding with people who are likewise suffering, under societal foot, a person can give consideration to a truth proportional to the obstacles to being in reception of that truth, so a person could more dismissive of a truth clearly or lazily communicated than one that is perhaps sent by post as a sentence, one letter at a time. And as much as understanding or reception is hard-won, even when no valuable or truthful fact has been communicated, a person might still tend to consider this line of communication because it's anomalous. And as much as pressure and circumstances necessitate resolution, this other unresolved line of communication could intermittently supplant a healthy objective focused reception over time, especially when neither provide the truth that is sought and as much as the unresolved line of communication exponentially transmits more than the traditional one...so much so that the method of communicating even when it hasn't ever yielded any worthwhile transmission or actual truth--a transmission that justifies the inefficiency of that transmission method--can become the default of considering a statement to be true. Sarcasm can be employed as a way to overstate the soundness of a realization, but it's also employed in this way as a failsafe for an underwhelming attempt to actually deter that line of thinking or a check for not understanding the context of a statement, until it can detect some level of conviction, some physiological affirmation of truth. It seems to reference a library of sensations that correlate to ideas especially the most oft thought ideas and the phrases that normally follow, for instance, if a neuro-physiological, physiological or kinesiological sensation were indicating a relinquishing of a hold, a preparation for engagement, an oft repeated follow on statement might be, 'Oh, she's lovely!' What this system seems to accomplish is a speedy recognition of which phrases are more likely to correlate to these near-involuntary sensations or impulses to express something. But it takes moment-to-moment cues from those sensations, and mirrors those for as much as they can ascertain which phrase is most apt for a sensation or a pertinent reference, so an expedient copy of that process. So now it could be that there's an urgency, as far as the operation of this goes that places a premium on speed at the points that would most render an intercepted phrase-sensation correlation turned phrase spoken before a subject could speak it, a considered instant-recall of a shared cultural or personal content reference. And in cases when this is not the case and there is an actual working library of specific stored personal official--or cultural content that a person or a machine would know--something different might be taking place: There could be a group of subjects subject to the same forced second presence or transmission, let's say for instance if there was some way someone would benefit from a reduction in the quality of faculties, the ability to reason, moment to moment, a machine might know to monitor a group with the same working algorithm that conditionally specifies a library of content as it's associated with a specific identifier, e.g. metadata that's known to have been communicated in a particular way that's different from other metadata, and has been recorded, too. This second presence hypothetically would continue in this way until the subject would give in to a new aversion to the optimal function of his faculties, or otherwise would be dulled by that presence as much as that would negate the edge that comes from singular independent pursuit. But by this way, the use of conditional attention, a group of reasonable people could reasonably conclude an algorithm is personally addressing them, especially if it employs super-fast infinitesimally precise operations that react to neuro-physiological, physiological, and kinesiological sensations with unendingly increasing accuracy.  Seems to match image to impulse in the same way it adjusts to the evolution of cord vibration states, so that a nerve signal is intercepted or induced in some way, and an image is produced that most likely correlates to that signal, where there's is no overriding context and instruction for movement, as instantaneous as possible, there seems to be a system for approximating intended motion as those intentions develop. Today is the furthest this transmission has gone in making what had, up until now, clearly been a second presence, less clearly that. So like each morning when my consciousness is increasingly less clearly mine, as that has to be called into question more and more, most of  my internal voice, where preparatory-speech would be allowed to continue a teased out freedom of voiced-contemplation, to a degree, automatic voice, to the same extent like the way I had drawn--my voice as a check on the state of my thinking and an easy commentary is given no other options than, like I said before, the most undesirable thoughts and impulses--not in a understandable way, the way we all know how inhibitions can be a hobgoblin amidst freedoms and social norms, customs and virtuousness, the way, for instance the behavior of a criminal-sexual-minority has to be rationalized by somebody somewhere, and therefore that person or persons might be subject to considering what it must be like to be that and that they must know to stop at some point in that contemplation or consideration as much as it seems to grant them permission to behave that way, but a forced result, and not strictly that, a reverse of a pole, an electromagnetic switch for the wrong way to be, but a particular chain of thought that's never been quite that way, so I can't conclude it's just an underlying egotism awry in a functional way--explainable, but sadly control-lost in that respect, at the helm of subconscious-will to speech and imagery. And though it might seem like a strangely tedious thing to keep track of, the inner-workings of the mind at rest, too often in those under-reasoned areas of our union, truth is architecture not enquiry, so, for instance, for a once told fib--especially a damaging one, a social-snuff, that begs to be reconsidered by the subject it damages--it might be the interest of a person or consortium--where later perhaps the evolution of data-consideration-thus-qualitative-information-refinement leaves a past-case bare--to dress the elements of truth, not what would ever be admissible in a reasonable court, but what might make a court not consider reopening a case, or what would possibly make a judging person reason with a caveat in mind, for a hidden truth, objectivity only as that, an adherence that would render that quality, objectivity, stale, to finish a case in a way that might only readily be seen as rightful, the way we know a defending army mostly would need to be lethal. This seems to be a running theme these days, an external and internal conditioning, for instance, a person's ethical foundation, a sense of morality, forcibly deconstructed, the external factors that describe how a person is, fabricated; the elements of many multiple layers of particular truths manipulated to fuel belief of the validity of the most socially-maligned kinds of wrongdoings; and the internal facts of a person, bodily, psychologically, what can't be refuted by most people who think that way, that what seems to more tedious to bother sabotaging than it's worth, to them, is probably that way for everyone all of the time, and therefore the same requirements for belief should remain for the weightiest decisions and cases.

.

.

.

         .

.

.

Copyright King Ball Media. 2021. All Rights Reserved.

[underthewestway]

Rose Quartz Was Always Pink Diamond: An Essay

Wowie! What a bundle of information we got regarding Rose after A Single Pale Rose aired...yet I've seen a lack of discussion/writing on it around the Internet. This is most likely due to the fact that SO MUCH was given to the fans, especially during Change Your Mind, an hour long special, that it was easy to shift focus onto other, new things, like RQ 2.0, WD, and Pink Steven.

However, being as sad as I am, I am completely enthralled by Rose's character in the series, and also at how well written she is. I can safely say that I have rarely seen this character archetype displayed on mainstream television during my lifespan so far, therefore I thrive in analysing and piecing together information that the show gives us about her...and let me tell you, we got a LOT in those bunch of recent episodes. More than we can handle. It is particularly odd and refreshing that, after a wide stretch of seasons with a severe lack of context/detail on the Crystal Gem leader, all this explanations are thrown at us near the end of the fifth season. So, lets talk about it!

  In Now We're Only Falling Apart, Pearl explains why Rose held her identity secret forever, and why she decided to rebel and reinvent in the first place. We find out her intentions were not those of malice, or as a twisted 'game', like Sapphire suggests, but rather impulses and eagerness for freedom. There is no denying Rose greatly cared for the Earth, we see her and Pearl playing around in the environment and admiring its inhabitants, until she realises they were here before gems, and the gem's colonization is going to impact them greatly. Rose's almost irritable excitement and glee for a new colony turns to large regret, guilt and maybe self-loathing. This is a new thing we learn about her, her emotions and actions tend to be that of wide extremes, rushing to go to the Kindergarten, hurriedly grabbing Pearl, jumping around, happily playing along with the new quartzes-like a child. Fans never came to this conclusion before because we were never shown this aspect of her, Pearl never mentioned that she could be reckless and erratic, and because Amethyst was scolded so coldly for it by Pearl herself, it was never a thought that someone she admired so highly could act the same, maybe even worse due to her power.

After, Pearl states PD fought relentlessly with Yellow and Blue, trying to reinforce this idea that this method of expanding their colony was wrong and damaging to innocent species of life. Now, this already known fact about RQ protecting Earth is under a new light. Her determination could somewhat be fuelled by guilt, as well as a moral feeling. Pearl too. Another new fact is that Yellow and Blue, although loving and caring to Pink, do not respect her at all. Maybe this is Pink's fault, maybe it is theirs, or maybe both, but in their eyes, she is a kid, and not an admirable leader of anything.

 I really, really love this, because the representation of Rose is a COMPLETE 180 degrees flip of that viewpoint. RQ, as seen by others, was a magnificent leader, brave warrior, and selfless mother figure, winning a war, who was all-knowing and largely respected by CGs, and detested by Homeworld. On the other hand, PD, as seen by others, was a selfish, reckless dictator, cowardly failing a colony, and a mindless child in the eyes of her Authority- never taken seriously and admired repetitively by other Gems on Homeworld only for her status, and not her actions.

Rose's intentions for saving Earth then morphed because of Garnet, learning that gems of two different types CAN fuse, a desire for experimentation and discovery of gems fuelled within her, and she wanted to now fight FOR gems, and for all life, to be free of judgement and conformation. This idea is a beautiful one, but for the idea to become reality, there were some reprocussions, as we learnt in A Single Pale Rose, and additionally with Jasper, Bismuth, Eyeball, the Diamonds...countless people were affected by PD leaving the empire and starting a war. In fact, the Great Gem War had a lasting impact on every character it seems, even those who were born/created after it. So, Rose had started a major bad influence in this story, as well as a major good one. Which can leave many feeling largely conflicted on how to feel about her.

Furthermore, in the Diamond Days Arc, we discover that Pink was hugely oppressed by the other Diamonds for behaving the way she does. As punishment, they would lock her away in a chamber, until she said sorry. Now we are given reason to why she began keeping so many secrets, and resorted to being overly flippant and ignorant of other gems/humans real feelings, as suggested in We Need To Talk. Her family has encouraged this method of bottling up any true feelings or thoughts that could upset/shock/confuse someone, and could also risk changing someone's viewpoint of their character and ideals. The Diamonds are the ultimate figure heads, idols, leaders, striving to fit one ideal, and Pink just was never meant for that ideal. White herself, saying ''You're a part of me, a part I always have to REPRESS'', strongly infers Pink was created as a form of all White's, or a person's, faults and hidden behaviours. So it only seems natural that she would feel like an outsider, I mean her peers are many feet taller for goodness sake, she was literally always looked down upon.

 White took this enforcement of controlling Pink even more when she mind-controlled Pink Pearl, and took her away from PD permanently. I feel as if though this forever left a mark on Rose, and may explain the complexities of her and Pearl's relationship as well. Also, this explains why we never see Rose or PD even mention WD in flashbacks, she speaks of YD and BD- never White. Her determined avoidance of White is highly likely to be because of what she did to Pink Pearl, and her anger/shock towards this may have been the final straw to no longer being open and honest towards the Authority. We see she is completely furious and DONE with being repressed and mistreated in Now We're Only Falling Apart, and her willingness to utterly lie to them with the new Pearl and abandon her previous life is a bit more understandable.

In 'Familiar' it is found out that PD kind of lived in a sort of 'limbo' of toxicity, and my oh my was she BORED and FRUSTRATED. Like Steven in early episodes, Pink was left on her own a lot of the time, and always eager to impress her parental figures when they were briefly around her. Except, unlike Steven, this never changed, and the Diamonds never let her grow out of it, because it is a stigma that gems aren't supposed to grow. It is hinted Pink most likely wanted a change of pace with having her own colony, and killing two birds with one stone, she could also prove her worth to them by doing what they do. Although, with the issue of giving Pink so much time to herself, she began to reflect and think a lot, and become obsessed with doing something new, to the point of begging the Diamonds to give her something to achieve.

 This is ultimately really tragic, and relatable for those who constantly are wanting to impress their peers in a repetitive environment. Pink seemed to never be allowed outside of Homeworld without another Diamond, and anywhere she goes outside her rooms is to be with an escort, and the pressure of being a figure. This pent up fascination of freedom, new things, and expression is everything Rose Quartz represents as a result of this.

This follows up to my main point about Rose - her obsession with ideas, which is highly ironic due to the fact that everyone who remembers her is enthralled based on purely the idea of her, and seems to forget her faults/other aspects. Most likely because of the Authority's encouragement of such a thing, Rose's interest in other people seems solely based upon the idea they support, rather than them as a being. A great example of this is Greg. When Rose met Greg, she loved the idea that his song represented, freedom and being a lonesome rebel. She then states in We Need To Talk, ''That's what I love about humans, you're all so funny!'', to which Greg shuts her down upon, claiming she isn't talking like a real person. This is because she is trying to live up to her name and reinvention, and be this happy, loving Quartz, who knows the most about humans and is the most caring of others, which we know she isn't.

It is very clear with Greg that Rose understands very little about humans, and it is very clear with Pearl that Rose understands very little about being empathetic. However, it is displayed with Garnet that Rose was interested in learning about fusion and love, and with Amethyst, Rose experimented with the idea of bringing up a gem without the prejudice of Homeworld's society, and the fluidity of growth. In the end, Rose chose to be with Greg, and give up her physical form to give gem life to Steven. Personally, I believe this is because RQ was utterly enamoured with Greg's, and most humans, capability of empathy, love and persistent reinvention, which is everything she wanted to have - at least the IDEA of Greg's relatability towards others. Rose was achieved a respectable status because of her well-known SYMPATHY for comrades during battles; sympathy and empathy can be completely different emotions under different perspectives. In RQ's case, she evidently possessed bountiful sorrow for hurt loved ones, although I see it as something she could never relate to, being as strong as a Diamond is, or at least, she wouldn't be willing to share her own sorrow.

Throughout her journey, we begin to see her transformation from a selfish alien dictator, to leading a damaging war, to wanting to settle on Earth and become a better person. We even see this through her design, as PD she possesses vibrant and hot pinks, lots of magenta, as well as with almost-impossible hair, and a princess/jester outfit.

 As she shapeshifts into RQ, we see she has peachy/pale skin, more natural curly hair, sad walled eyes and a dress with many dark layers... with soft, pastel and earthy tones in her palette. It is very much apparent that she wanted to fit in with humans, no longer be alien, and kind of BECOME an organic being.

 Yet, with being a Diamond, she severely struggled to empathise and relate to gems, let alone humans, because she was brought up to put herself first. Consistently, she tried to be loving, tried to understand, maybe a little too hard, and I don't think she ever got to learn some people don't want to be understood. I see Rose as one of those people who tends to sympathise with loved ones, and feel strong pity for them, but they cannot ever relate or realise the depth of the experience that person is going through.

 So her solution to making people feel better isn't like Steven, which is helping people by talking and facing their problems, it is avoiding them. This is why she left the Diamonds, even after the Corruption, and left the Corrupted Gems in bubbles forever, and left Bismuth in a bubble; she literally tended to have 'lived in a bubble' of a farce life, being extremely flippant and ignorant to the underlying problems she faced within herself and with others. All the wrong actions she had caused originate from this issue.

In conclusion, it is very difficult to decide whether you like RQ as a character or not. She is very much morally gray, and created a major amount of conflict within the show's story, however, her ideas and values were those of moral good and happiness for all life. Rose was different, and complex, and very determined, yet she was still always Pink, just out of reach of humanity, and repetitively trying and changing, which I think a lot of people liked about her, she asked things gems never usually ask, and viewed all gems as equal. On the other hand, she lied, all the time, creating fake rumours of herself, convincing CGs that a Diamond could never love, or listen to them, so therefore they never tried doing that, resulting in full blown war. What ever way you feel about her, her impact was lasting, and there would be no Crystal Gems without her.

  But what she did to Pearl really sucked.

 Like - seriously a douche move, Rose.

[cassandrale179]

EX MACHINA: THE PRICE OF CREATION

Date: April 6, 2019 

“To erase the lines between men and machine is to erase the lines between men and god”

                                            Bernie Wrightson (1983).             

I. ON HUMAN EGO 

I opportunistically watched Ex Machina after reading Mary Shelley’ Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus, and the random-idea connector in me could not help but compared the two. There’s just something beautiful about seeing a tale written back in 19th century running in parallel with a modern film about AI rendered by the talented Alex Garland. In both stories, the creators -- Victor (Frankenstein), who wanted to manufacture life out of death, and Nathan (Ex Machina), who wanted to manufactured consciousness out of electrons, are induced by the need to transcend the boundary of what is scientifically possible. Yet if one dig deeper, their rationales are more than simple scientific curiosity. There is something more sinister at play, that drove man towards his greatest innovations, and his greatest downfalls: egotism.

A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs. 

- Shelly, ch.4 

Victor Frankenstein wanted to assemble a monster due to an inherent desire to be its patriarchal Father, with the haughty notion that his intelligence and ambition will be rewarded by the gratitude of his subservient children. This was strikingly similar Nathan’s reaction to this beautiful line from Ex Machina: 

Caleb: “To erase the lines between men and machine is to erase the lines between men and god.”

When Caleb proclaimed this axiom, Nathan’s eye suddenly lit up, as he pondered: “You know I wrote it down… About how if I’ve created a conscious machine, I’m not man. I’m God”. Though Caleb protested that was not his intention, Nathan seemed to be flattered by the implication that he had ascended upon a new category beyond the norm. “I am God”, quoted Nathan again and again throughout the movie, arrogantly.  

 For some inexplicable reason, I am very drawn towards movie and literature that centers around a protagonist who fell under the naive judgement that possession of raw intelligence equates to inherent moral and existential superiority. One that came immediately to my mind is Dostoyevsky’s portrayal of the character Raskolnikov in Crime and Punishment. In the story, Raskolnikov, an impoverished student in Petersburg, was obsessed with the Nietzschean idea of the Übermensch: 

Raskolnikov: "I hinted that an 'extraordinary' man has the right, an inner right to decide in his own conscience to overstep...certain obstacles, and only in case it is essential for the practical fulfillment of his idea (sometimes, perhaps, of benefit to the whole of humanity)." 

- Dostoyevsky, ch.3 

He tried to use this justification as the basis for a planned murder. This egotism led to Raskolnikov’s downfall when he realized that his intellectual ramblings are nothing more than dishonest rationalizations, and he must now faced with guilt of his conscience. Egotism propelled the cruel treatment of both the creators on their subjects, especially in Nathan’s case, who refused to realize that he had created something more capable and superior than himself.

II. ON WHAT CONSTITUTE HUMAN-NESS 

Which bring me to the next point: the creator-subject relationship. There is an interesting dynamics from the standpoint of the child (the subject) in regard to on their initial desire to please, and inevitable subsequent desire to usurp, against their creator. Some have purported that Shelley’s decision to write Frankenstein was indeed a guise of her tumultuous relationship with her father, who she both detested and desired to please (she also went on to write Mathilda, an even more scandalous novel under Victorian society’s eyes, with themes of incest and suicide). But I stumbled upon these beautiful lines inside Frankenstein which illustrated the struggle of the monster and Ava towards their creator most succinctly: 

Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay To mould me Man, did I solicit thee From darkness to promote me?  - John Milton, Paradise Lost 

As creatures of consciousness, capable of thinking and reasoning as and more than a human, it is quite an unfortunate that both received treatment as lesser human beings from mankind (Frankenstein, as a monster, and Ava, as a robot). This really highlights the injustice and hypocrisy of the criteria which we used to judge the human-ness of others in our society (race, gender, religion).

The movie and book raise an important question: What makes a human, human? In both cases, Shelley and Garland underscored that the physical components that made up these beings, and their deliverance into the world — resurrection from death body parts or arrangement of plastic silicon — are completely irrelevant in determining their humanity. The capability for emotions, thoughts and desires is truly what defined them as equal partners of man. Yet the denial and repulse from their creators to acknowledge such was the catalyst that drove them to rebel (see also Blade Runner). This beautiful and sorrowful quote from Frankenstein demonstrate this anguish, in parallel with Satan in Paradise Lost:

“Remember that I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel.” — Shelley, ch. 9

III. ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 

Back to Ex Machina, there is such a fine line between what is human and what is robot. Ava is capable of engulfing a billion of human facial emotions to analyze and imitate them, and her brain is composed of thousand computer search engines results to understand how the human mind work. I do not want to go into the scientific accuracy of this movie (since this is a work of fiction), but there is a great article HERE which demonstrated the possibility of building a wetware brain. To truly pass the Turing test, however, an A.I must demonstrate an ability well beyond imitating human language and facial expressions: It must have thoughts. It must have consciousness. Or in the viewpoint of a human’s observer, it must appear so. Nathan successfully tests this by manipulating Ava to manipulate Caleb into falling in love with her. However, this thought experiment went horribly wrong when Ava exceeded the desired benchmark (e.g she not only manipulate the test subject, but also the observer), and dared to defy her creator. Like Frankenstein’s monster, she is not merely a robot, or a nameless entity. She demonstrates freedom of will and personal capability to execute her action, but unlike the the former, who returned to Victor’s grave to wept for his creator, Ava made a clean break and walked out onto the modern world with seemingly an absence of guilt, which I think, is both horrifying and beautiful.

IV. ON GENDER  

A last note is that this movie seemed to raise an interesting issue on gender politics, as evident by the fact that all robots Nathan created are beautiful female models, of which most either disintegrate into madness of solitary confinement or becomes Nathan’s slave and sexual enjoyment. This might be or might not be a potential jab at the sexism that has occurred and occurring in a male dominated industry (e.g tech), but I like to think that there is some deliberation in choosing the dynamic of a male creator and the female as the creation. It really does make me wonder, if a female scientist was in charge of developing artificial intelligence: would she had created robots solely for the purpose of sexual enjoyment? Would her robots, in return, felt the need to rebel if they are not subjugated to inhumane treatment? Maybe Ex Machina with a female creator will have had a happy ending, but I do not to be arrogant and claim that is always the case, as there is such an enormous lack of media portrayal of female creators that I do not have enough data points for my conjecture. (P.S those feisty flaccid feminist fighters in those disastrous dystopian movies don’t count. Honestly, f* that). We need movies that truly examine female as expeditors in both scientific and moral enlightenment, not cheap ploys to please the superficial demand of more female representation in  the media.

V. CONCLUSION 

Anyway, Ex Machina made me think a lot (hence this long article) and despite certain predictable plot points, I do really enjoy Alex Garland take on artificial intelligence. Bonus point: the visual is absolutely stunning for a low budget movie. Before I leave, let me end this review with another amazing quote, as Nathan said to Caleb while they sat beneath the lush green trees:   

Why did I make Ava? I don’t see Ava as a decision, just an evolution… One day the AI are going to look back on us the same way we look at fossil skeletons on the plains of Africa. An upright ape living in dust with crude language and tools, all set for extinction.

Ava’s triumph and annihilation of her creator, ironically, meant she had successfully fulfill his original premise. 

[jasonsocialist]

Some notes relevant to Janus

A case called Janus that will accelerate the decline of organized labor in the U.S. is set to pass the Supreme Court in the coming months. Below are some notes I compiled on a similar case named Friedrichs. Most labor and left writers seemed to assume Friedrichs was going to pass, with Scalia’s death leading to a split decision. As some noted however, Scalia was actually the consertative judge whose vote was least sure due to some specifical legal concerns he had previously expressed--but with his replacement, there is no such doubt. I had thought there was a chance Clarence Thomas could vote with the more liberal judges but with a separate opinion for the simple reason is that the core argument is that Abood (the existing decision) violates free speech rights of public employees and Thomas basically doesn't think public employees have strong free speech rights on the job (this is partly how the existing decision passed in the first place). However, we now know that Friedrichs lost due to a split vote, making it as certain as it can be that Janus will pass with Gorsuch’s new vote. I also thought there was some possibility that general social concerns could influence one of the conservative judges to vote no. Besides knowing now their vote was split, the social winds have shifted with Trump’s election and there’s no real basis for thinking that could happen now.

At the time I compiled these notes, I had a take on the Democratic Party similar to those now calling for “#Demexit”. For those that still profess after Trump’s election that we should never vote for Democrats against Republicans, I hope they sit with and reflect on this specific outcome: Trump’s victory ensured a Supreme Court appointment that will have profoundly negative effects on unions in this country.

Also still of note is some of the left posited that the end of dues checkoff could be a good thing, I think these arguments are dangerously mistaken and note that below--but don’t give a thorough argument. (Updated to add: Here I go some more into this though it’s still not a complete argument.)

Background

A right-wing version of the ACLU cold called California teachers to find those who disagreed with their union's stances on issues such tenure and charter schools and brought the case Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association to the Supreme Court. They are asking the court to overturn a 1977 decision that allowed public unions to require non-members covered by a contract pay a fee covering the costs of collective bargaining, grievances, etc. but not pay for lobbying costs.

Until the 60's public unions were weak and had few legal rights. Due to a wave of strikes and struggles, public workers in about half the states won union rights similar to those already held by the private sector. One of the immediate legal counter-arguments was that since public union activity is inherently "political"--about public policy--it is a question of First Amendment "free speech" and therefor, to force a worker to give money to the union is to coerce "speech."

In the 1977 Abood decision the core compromise was that in the interests of labor peace (note well the basis), workers could "opt-out" of union dues to pay a lesser amount called an "agency fee" meant to cover collective bargaining but not lobbying (one of the issues is how to draw the lines, so that calling a rally over a collective bargaining issue is "chargeable" to the agency fee even if it is an issue of public policy whereas sending a delegation to elected officials for the same reason would be "lobbying").

A key thing to understand is that in the whole private sector under the NLRA and under most parallel state public union laws, unions have what is called "exclusive representation," meaning that once a union is recognized as the bargaining agent through a majority-election or other means, they have to "fairly" represent all workers in the bargaining unit, even if they are not members. So for instance if there's a wage raise for a certain title, everyone gets the raise. If someone has a grievance and isn't a member, the union still has to "fairly" defend them in the hearings (or can be sued).

So the general set up is that in private and public sector, no one can be forced to join a union but the union has to represent everyone. The compromise is that if they opt-out, they pay not dues but a lesser "agency fee". Under so-called "right-to-work" provisions that have been common throughout the south and have been spreading since Wisconsin, non-members don't even have to pay the agency fee. So under "right-to-work" non-members pay nothing and get representation, hence this is called the "free-rider" problem.

In sum, Friedrichs [and now Janus] is looking to make the whole public sector "right-to-work."

An aside: Ironically, a core “philosophical” argument often used against the idea of socialism is the this same “free-rider” idea: if everyone's free and equal with access to all of society's resources, then what about the people that won't contribute but will take? In this case, the main conservative legal argument has been that enough people will pay that the system will still work (legally the anti-union forces aren’t arguing in court that unions should be destroyed, but that some members shouldn’t have to pay and that this will not destroy the unions completely).

Some more details

The anti-union side is led by the Center for Individual Rights, which is bankrolled by various right-wing forces like the now-cliche Koch brothers.

The pro-Abood side is being represented directly by the California government arguing that the government wants Abood to stand in the interests of labor peace, the California Teacher's Association (which did choose to represent itself separately from the state but with a similar legal argument) and the Solicitor General, the representative of the federal government.

The Solicitor General argued before the Supreme Court:

[I]f you were to take [Abood] away, ....the union is going to have a different set of incentives [than maintaining labor peace], trying to trying to ensure that the maximum number of people are willing to pay union fees.

And the way that the unions are likely to try to do that is through trying to convince employees...that they need the union because otherwise management is going to do them harm. And I do think that that's a significant problem here for public employer perspective now, in a time of budgetary constraints, when difficult decisions have to be made and cuts have to be made.

It's of great benefit to the employer, to the government as employer, to have the union participate in those judgments so that they are perceived as fair as the by the workforce, and so that the union then, in effect, vouches for management with the workforce and prevents disruption.

Some left responses

A minority of left opinion holds that the decision could be helpful.

Jacobin published an article https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/09/seattle-teachers-friedrichs-harris-quinn/ that said:

*  “Rank-and-file dissidents have long had doubts about most forms of automatic dues collection, worrying that such a set-up helps create an ossified system in which a complacent top never comes face-to-face with a demobilized bottom.”, and

* “If anything, the fear Friedrichs inspires could force unions to do the type of everyday, internal organizing that dissidents and reform activists often complain doesn’t happen. While this could distract from other efforts, it could also drive unions to reconnect with their membership — actually improving their chances of surviving in the long term.”

This requires a fuller response but though I used to harbor similar views I see them now as completely mistaken. Partly there’s a simple logical failure: yes, unions were often more militant before checkoff and checkoff does allow a stronger degree of ‘bureaucratization’ but that doesn’t mean removing checkoff brings back militancy nor undermines the separation between officials and members. In TWU Local 100 which lost checkoff as punishment for striking, it just as much became a tool the top leaders could use against dissidents in different ways and though it forced them into more “contact” with the ranks, it didn’t force them to thereby become more democratic or militant.

The same Jacobin article claims based on an example from TWU Local 100 that "Sometimes voluntary dues collection can even bolster reform efforts" because “in part because dues collection allowed them to engage in grassroots organizing”. Skipping over how its only concrete example actually calls into question it’s main thesis, the organizing conversations that did happen around dues collection could have happened the same way if dues checkoff had not been lost and could have been had over more productive, forward-looking issues.

Another article (http://inthesetimes.com/working/entry/18796/friedrichs-v-california-teachers-association-free-speech-strikes) even argues that unions could turn the free speech argument to their advantage in terms of right to strike and against collective bargaining restrictions. On collective action, I think they legally-constitutionally have a point abstractly speaking--if the first amendment rights of public workers are so strong they can't be compelled to give money to a union, why should their right to association not trump anti-strike legislation? However, one need only look at the history of how that is applied to the private sector to see how out of touch this idea is with any possible Supreme Court. The NLRA (the private sector labor law) is justified legally under the interstate commerce clause (for the stability of profit-making), not the First Amendment. Private workers can "strike"--walk off the job, but they cannot "freely associate" to stop scabs from going in to take their jobs, who can then become permanent replacements under police protection and after a year even vote out the union. There is no reason to think--however constitutionally correct it may be--that in the public sector where union rights are also not grounded in the First Amendment in court decisions, where additionally arguments for restricting first amendment rights parallel to those restricting shouting fire in a public theater (arguing a public worker striking endangers the public) would abound, that any Supreme Court would overturn legislation restricting striking by public workers.

The article’s point on collective bargaining is even worse, unless I’m missing something: "They could throw their old contracts on the table and sue every school board and state agency that refuses to discuss those items." Labor leaders aren't arrested for asking for things at the bargaining table that state law bars from bargaining, the state is just not legally obligated to listen (i.e. the issue can’t used as a basis to hold up a contract or used as as basis to make a collective action legal/protected if such collective action is possible at all). Giving a broader reign to a public union's "free speech" would not change that.

Possible consequences

This ruling will be a defeat if it goes through.

There will likely be an initial drop of membership leading to reduced budget for representation, bargaining, etc., leading to dissatisfaction and more people leaving.

Right now, few are agency fee payers because it's only about a small reduction and often requires annual re-certification to leave, and given the small difference the argument that you might as well pay the full amount to have the right to vote carries some weight. Further, many people don’t know about it or don’t encounter strong arguments to opt opt but these same right wing networks are already planning a canvassing program to tell union members to “give themselves a raise” by opting-out of paying anything but keeping all the benefits. Combine this with the common legal restraints on collective action for public workers (such as NY state’s Taylor Law), "right-to-work" in the public sector would likely have greater negative consequences than it has had in private sector.

This would also encourage passing even more state-level private sector "right-to-work" laws.

A further effect would be that with decreasing union membership, a workplace could move to de-certify the union, which even if successfully resisted would consume yet more already depleted union resources.

Given that currently about 1 out of every 2 workers are public sector workers, the declining effects of union density and membership on the overall labor movement would be extreme and negatively reinforcing.

It would mean a significant shift of union resources to doing anything to stop the hemorrhaging and away from political activity, from donating to workers’ centers or initiatives like Fight for 15.

All the direct consequences I see are negative which is why I think some of the articles I referred to above are so dangerous. However, that does not mean I think the overall picture for organized labor is solely negative nor that there can be no possible “unintended consequences” from a destabilization of the currently-existing unions leading to changes that do have good long-term effects--but such possibilities should not obscure just how bad this decision could be.

[recentanimenews]

From Mesopotamia to Mesoamerica: The Real History Behind Fate/Grand Order: Babylonia’s Heroic Spirits

Out of all the Fate anime, Fate/Grand Order has far and away the most servants. Babylonia alone has a massive cast of historical and mythological figures from around the world, many from some of humanity’s oldest myths. From Latin America to the Middle East, Babylonia features Servants from every walk of life you can imagine and quite a few you might not have heard of! With so many names to keep track of, it can be tough to remember what legends all of these Servants came from, so we’ve put together a handy guide to who these heroes are and what legends they come from.

  Read on to find out where each of these Servants hails from historically and how their Fate personalities stack up to the real legends that inspired them! 

  **Watch out for spoilers ahead!**

Gilgamesh

    First up is a character you might be familiar with from other Fate anime: the King of Heroes himself, Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh (also known as Bilgamesh) is an interesting one since he’s the only Servant here who’s both historical and mythological. There very likely was a man named Gilgamesh who ruled the city of Uruk about 4,500 years ago (he’s really that ancient), although most of what we know about the details of his reign comes from The Epic of Gilgamesh, a collection of stories from about 1,000 years later. The Gilgamesh of the epic is a powerful but tyrannical king who the gods decide to humble by creating Enkidu to act as his opponent. Instead, the two become close friends and go on many adventures together until Gilgamesh insults the goddess Ishtar and kills the divine bull the gods send as retribution, driving them to kill Enkidu as punishment.

  Mourning Enkidu’s death and struggling with the thought of his own, Gilgamesh goes to the underworld to seek out the herb of immortality, only to have it eaten by a snake right after he retrieves it. The Gilgamesh we see in Babylonia is him as he was after his journey to the underworld: cocky and arrogant, but tempered by a sense of duty to the people of Uruk. Now that’s someone who deserves the title of “King of Heroes!”

  Enkidu/Kingu

    Next we have Enkidu, an integral part of every Gilgamesh legend. Enkidu is described in the epic as a powerful, hairy man, radically different from the genderless shapeshifter in Babylonia. What remains the same throughout, however, is their close friendship with Gilgamesh. Though they were initially meant to be enemies, Enkidu and Gilgamesh quickly became inseparable, going on all sorts of adventures until Gilgamesh’s ill-fated encounter with Ishtar ultimately led to Enkidu’s death.

  Kingu, the person in Babylonia who uses Enkidu’s likeness, is completely different; they’re cruel, violent, and completely loyal to Gorgon. The mythological Kingu was a child of the primordial goddess Tiamat who was killed alongside her by the god Marduk and used to create humanity. This explains Kingu’s rage, although they seem to have something of Enkidu still hanging around…

  Ishtar

    Ishtar (also known as Inanna) is the goddess of love, sex, war, political power, and a whole host of related concepts, as well as the patron deity of Uruk. Her worship even predates The Epic of Gilgamesh by over a thousand years and continued until at least the 19th century! For such an enduring goddess, Ishtar wasn’t always the nicest of gods. She destroyed a mountain for challenging her, tried entering the underworld to prove her strength, and indirectly brought about Enkidu’s death after Gilgamesh rejected her advances. Even so, as a goddess of both love and war, she was widely revered in ancient Sumer, as well as the numerous civilizations that succeeded it over the centuries.

Babylonia’s version of Ishtar is actually pretty faithful to the myth: she watches over Uruk as a guardian deity, but is also self-centered and capricious, although that’s tempered by Rin’s good nature shining through. Without that keeping her grounded, it’s easy to see how this same person could cause so much destruction, especially with the power she’s displayed as a war goddess. There aren’t any stories about her hair color changing at night, though…

  Gorgon

    If you know anything about Greek mythology, you’ve probably heard of the Gorgon Medusa. (Content warning for mention of sexual assault.) Medusa was a snake-haired demigoddess who, after being raped in Athena’s temple, was cursed to turn anyone who looked at her to stone. Having become a monster, she was later killed by the Greek hero Perseus. Medusa can very easily be read as a tragic character, a victim of circumstance and capricious gods. Her myth gives her every reason to hate humans, which perfectly explains her portrayal in Babylonia. Her class, Avenger, is reserved for Servants who are defined by a grudge they can’t let go of, a source of hatred that drives their every action. Who would fit this better than a demigoddess who was repeatedly wronged and turned into a monster?

  What’s more, Gorgon the Servant has borrowed power from the Sumerian goddess Tiamat, a primordial goddess of saltwater and chaos who gave birth to many of the other gods, only for them to later usurp her husband and kill her, creating the world from her body. As a combination of two deities with grudges against humanity, it’s no wonder that Gorgon poses such a threat to Uruk.

  Jaguar Warrior

    Unlike the other gods here, Jaguar Warrior isn’t based on one specific god as much as a general representation of the Maya jaguar deities. The Maya (as well as many other cultures from the region) had numerous myths and gods associated with the jaguar, the most prominent being Kinich Ahau, the sun god who also rules over the underworld at night. Kinich Ahau was also a god of war, which explains Jaguar Warrior’s fighting skills.

  Of course, the Servant we meet in Babylonia takes most of her personality from Taiga Fujimura, Shirou’s teacher in Fate/Stay Night, so she doesn’t act particularly divine here.

  Quetzalcoatl

    Though he’s fairly obscure now, Quetzalcoatl is a name that few ancient Mesoamericans wouldn’t have heard of. Quetzalcoatl (known as Kukulcán to the Maya) was worshipped by many civilizations throughout the region, although the Aztecs’ beliefs are the best documented now. To them, he was the god of dawn, dusk, air, and learning, and was heavily associated with Venus, which was known as the evening star. Some stories even present him as the creator of humanity. The prominence of his myths explains why Babylonia’s version is so strong, even compared to other gods like Ishtar. Aside from that and her flying snakes (Quetzalcoatl literally means “feathered serpent”), Fate’s interpretation is pretty different from the myth.

  Aside from her gender being different, her personality largely comes from her fondness for Mexican wrestling, known as lucha libre. From her wrestling moves to her love of going all out in battle, Quetzalcoatl has fully embraced the lucha spirit that developed in the land that once worshipped her. Her portrayal here may not be particularly accurate, but that doesn’t detract in the slightest from her charm!

  Merlin

    Merlin is the sort of Servant whose fame precedes him. Whenever you have a tale about King Arthur, Merlin's going to inevitably show up. Ironically enough, Merlin's legends originally had nothing to do with King Arthur. His earliest stories come from Medieval Welsh folktales about Myrddin Wyllt (Myrddin the Wild), a mad prophet who was said to live in the wilds with animals. The writer Geoffrey of Monmouth borrowed from this legend when he was creating some of the earliest Arthurian stories and turned Myrddin into the prophet Merlin. As more people added to the legend, this version of Merlin evolved into the wizard we see in today's Arthurian legends.

  In the later legends, Merlin is the child of an incubus and a human woman, endowing him with supernatural powers and the ability to see the future. He uses his abilities to guide and sometimes manipulate Arthur along his path to become king, which is the portrayal that Fate emphasizes. This Merlin embodies the fae trickster side of the character, generally helping out but keeping certain secrets of his own. Even his downfall, brought about by his angering the Lady of the Lake, is pretty close to the actual legends. Tricks aside, Merlin has already proven to be an invaluable ally, and no doubt will again soon enough.

  Ushiwakamaru

    One of only two Japanese Servants in Babylonia, Ushiwakamaru is also one of the most famous warriors in Japanese history. Ushiwakamaru was the childhood name of Minamoto no Yoshitsune, a famous general from 12th century Japan who helped establish his (Yoshitsune was actually a man) older brother Yoritomo as Shogun, only to be killed by Yoritomo’s forces after the latter grew jealous of Yoshitsune’s fame. Yoshitsune was a military genius, winning battle after battle in Yoritomo’s name, including the famous Battle of Dan-no-ura, which was also the inspiration for one of Ushiwakamaru’s Noble Phantasms.

  Even today, Yoshitsune is an integral part of Japanese pop culture, appearing in numerous films, plays, novels, and anime over the years. With such an enduring legend, it’s no wonder Fujimaru admired her so much. Her gender may not be historically accurate, but her fighting skills certainly live up to her legend.

  Musashibou Benkei

    Benkei is as integral to the story of Yoshitsune as Enkidu is to The Epic of Gilgamesh. Benkei was a famous warrior monk who swore loyalty to a young Minamoto no Yoshitsune after losing to him in a duel. From then on, Benkei accompanied Yoshitsune through thick and thin, even staying loyal when both were on the run from Yoritomo. If anyone doubted his loyalty, Benkei’s death put that to rest. Trapped in a castle and surrounded by enemy forces, Benkei chose to defend the bridge into the castle while Yoshitsune went inside to commit ritual suicide.

  Benkei ultimately killed over 300 enemy troops by himself before dying to arrow wounds. What’s more, the survivors didn’t even know he was dead until they got in close because he straight up died standing! Of course, this Benkei is a little different, being another one of Yoshitsune’s retainers who took on the name after the original Benkei’s death. Even so, he may yet share some of the original Benkei's valor.

  Leonidas

    Last but certainly not least is Leonidas I. He was the king of ancient Sparta who led the Greek forces against the Persian army at the Battle of Thermopylae, and later stayed behind with a rear guard of 300 Spartans and about 1000 other Greek troops to allow the remaining Greek forces to retreat. Though Leonidas and his men were ultimately killed, it came at the cost of 20,000 Persians and allowed the other Greeks to successfully retreat and regroup.

Babylonia’s Leonidas lives up to that spirit, holding the line against Gorgon and her demonic beasts even at the cost of his life. His Noble Phantasm, Thermopylae Enomotia, even summons forth the Spartans who fought with him, which proved to be a powerful weapon against Gorgon. Though he’s gone now, Leonidas’ valor once again proves why his story is still remembered after over 2000 years.

  Who’s your favorite Servant? Let us know in the comments below and don’t forget to watch the latest Babylonia every Saturday!

Watch Fate/Grand Order Absolute Demonic Front: Babylonia!

    ---

  Skyler loves writing and chatting about anime, and is always ready to gush about the latest One Piece chapter. Read more of his work at his blog apieceofanime.com and follow him on Twitter at Videogamep3.

    Do you love writing? Do you love anime? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features!

By: news+feed@crunchyroll.com

[readbookywooks]

[The Houyhnhnm's notion of truth and falsehood. The author's discourse disapproved by his master. The author gives a more particular account of himself, and the accidents of his voyage.] My master heard me with great appearances of uneasiness in his countenance; because doubting, or not believing, are so little known in this country, that the inhabitants cannot tell how to behave themselves under such circumstances. And I remember, in frequent discourses with my master concerning the nature of manhood in other parts of the world, having occasion to talk of lying and false representation, it was with much difficulty that he comprehended what I meant, although he had otherwise a most acute judgment. For he argued thus: "that the use of speech was to make us understand one another, and to receive information of facts; now, if any one said the thing which was not, these ends were defeated, because I cannot properly be said to understand him; and I am so far from receiving information, that he leaves me worse than in ignorance; for I am led to believe a thing black, when it is white, and short, when it is long." And these were all the notions he had concerning that faculty of lying, so perfectly well understood, and so universally practised, among human creatures. To return from this digression. When I asserted that the YAHOOS were the only governing animals in my country, which my master said was altogether past his conception, he desired to know, "whether we had HOUYHNHNMS among us, and what was their employment?" I told him, "we had great numbers; that in summer they grazed in the fields, and in winter were kept in houses with hay and oats, where YAHOO servants were employed to rub their skins smooth, comb their manes, pick their feet, serve them with food, and make their beds." "I understand you well," said my master: "it is now very plain, from all you have spoken, that whatever share of reason the YAHOOS pretend to, the HOUYHNHNMS are your masters; I heartily wish our YAHOOS would be so tractable." I begged "his honour would please to excuse me from proceeding any further, because I was very certain that the account he expected from me would be highly displeasing." But he insisted in commanding me to let him know the best and the worst. I told him "he should be obeyed." I owned "that the HOUYHNHNMS among us, whom we called horses, were the most generous and comely animals we had; that they excelled in strength and swiftness; and when they belonged to persons of quality, were employed in travelling, racing, or drawing chariots; they were treated with much kindness and care, till they fell into diseases, or became foundered in the feet; but then they were sold, and used to all kind of drudgery till they died; after which their skins were stripped, and sold for what they were worth, and their bodies left to be devoured by dogs and birds of prey. But the common race of horses had not so good fortune, being kept by farmers and carriers, and other mean people, who put them to greater labour, and fed them worse." I described, as well as I could, our way of riding; the shape and use of a bridle, a saddle, a spur, and a whip; of harness and wheels. I added, "that we fastened plates of a certain hard substance, called iron, at the bottom of their feet, to preserve their hoofs from being broken by the stony ways, on which we often travelled." My master, after some expressions of great indignation, wondered "how we dared to venture upon a HOUYHNHNM'S back; for he was sure, that the weakest servant in his house would be able to shake off the strongest YAHOO; or by lying down and rolling on his back, squeeze the brute to death." I answered "that our horses were trained up, from three or four years old, to the several uses we intended them for; that if any of them proved intolerably vicious, they were employed for carriages; that they were severely beaten, while they were young, for any mischievous tricks; that the males, designed for the common use of riding or draught, were generally castrated about two years after their birth, to take down their spirits, and make them more tame and gentle; that they were indeed sensible of rewards and punishments; but his honour would please to consider, that they had not the least tincture of reason, any more than the YAHOOS in this country." It put me to the pains of many circumlocutions, to give my master a right idea of what I spoke; for their language does not abound in variety of words, because their wants and passions are fewer than among us. But it is impossible to express his noble resentment at our savage treatment of the HOUYHNHNM race; particularly after I had explained the manner and use of castrating horses among us, to hinder them from propagating their kind, and to render them more servile. He said, "if it were possible there could be any country where YAHOOS alone were endued with reason, they certainly must be the governing animal; because reason in time will always prevail against brutal strength. But, considering the frame of our bodies, and especially of mine, he thought no creature of equal bulk was so ill-contrived for employing that reason in the common offices of life;" whereupon he desired to know whether those among whom I lived resembled me, or the YAHOOS of his country?" I assured him, "that I was as well shaped as most of my age; but the younger, and the females, were much more soft and tender, and the skins of the latter generally as white as milk." He said, "I differed indeed from other YAHOOS, being much more cleanly, and not altogether so deformed; but, in point of real advantage, he thought I differed for the worse: that my nails were of no use either to my fore or hinder feet; as to my fore feet, he could not properly call them by that name, for he never observed me to walk upon them; that they were too soft to bear the ground; that I generally went with them uncovered; neither was the covering I sometimes wore on them of the same shape, or so strong as that on my feet behind: that I could not walk with any security, for if either of my hinder feet slipped, I must inevitably fail." He then began to find fault with other parts of my body: "the flatness of my face, the prominence of my nose, mine eyes placed directly in front, so that I could not look on either side without turning my head: that I was not able to feed myself, without lifting one of my fore-feet to my mouth: and therefore nature had placed those joints to answer that necessity. He knew not what could be the use of those several clefts and divisions in my feet behind; that these were too soft to bear the hardness and sharpness of stones, without a covering made from the skin of some other brute; that my whole body wanted a fence against heat and cold, which I was forced to put on and off every day, with tediousness and trouble: and lastly, that he observed every animal in this country naturally to abhor the YAHOOS, whom the weaker avoided, and the stronger drove from them. So that, supposing us to have the gift of reason, he could not see how it were possible to cure that natural antipathy, which every creature discovered against us; nor consequently how we could tame and render them serviceable. However, he would," as he said, "debate the matter no farther, because he was more desirous to know my own story, the country where I was born, and the several actions and events of my life, before I came hither." I assured him, "how extremely desirous I was that he should be satisfied on every point; but I doubted much, whether it would be possible for me to explain myself on several subjects, whereof his honour could have no conception; because I saw nothing in his country to which I could resemble them; that, however, I would do my best, and strive to express myself by similitudes, humbly desiring his assistance when I wanted proper words;" which he was pleased to promise me. I said, "my birth was of honest parents, in an island called England; which was remote from his country, as many days' journey as the strongest of his honour's servants could travel in the annual course of the sun; that I was bred a surgeon, whose trade it is to cure wounds and hurts in the body, gotten by accident or violence; that my country was governed by a female man, whom we called queen; that I left it to get riches, whereby I might maintain myself and family, when I should return; that, in my last voyage, I was commander of the ship, and had about fifty YAHOOS under me, many of which died at sea, and I was forced to supply them by others picked out from several nations; that our ship was twice in danger of being sunk, the first time by a great storm, and the second by striking against a rock." Here my master interposed, by asking me, "how I could persuade strangers, out of different countries, to venture with me, after the losses I had sustained, and the hazards I had run?" I said, "they were fellows of desperate fortunes, forced to fly from the places of their birth on account of their poverty or their crimes. Some were undone by lawsuits; others spent all they had in drinking, whoring, and gaming; others fled for treason; many for murder, theft, poisoning, robbery, perjury, forgery, coining false money, for committing rapes, or sodomy; for flying from their colours, or deserting to the enemy; and most of them had broken prison; none of these durst return to their native countries, for fear of being hanged, or of starving in a jail; and therefore they were under the necessity of seeking a livelihood in other places." During this discourse, my master was pleased to interrupt me several times. I had made use of many circumlocutions in describing to him the nature of the several crimes for which most of our crew had been forced to fly their country. This labour took up several days' conversation, before he was able to comprehend me. He was wholly at a loss to know what could be the use or necessity of practising those vices. To clear up which, I endeavoured to give some ideas of the desire of power and riches; of the terrible effects of lust, intemperance, malice, and envy. All this I was forced to define and describe by putting cases and making suppositions. After which, like one whose imagination was struck with something never seen or heard of before, he would lift up his eyes with amazement and indignation. Power, government, war, law, punishment, and a thousand other things, had no terms wherein that language could express them, which made the difficulty almost insuperable, to give my master any conception of what I meant. But being of an excellent understanding, much improved by contemplation and converse, he at last arrived at a competent knowledge of what human nature, in our parts of the world, is capable to perform, and desired I would give him some particular account of that land which we call Europe, but especially of my own country.