#I am merely offering examples that the average person may not know had started out as fanfiction

[mrsjadecurtiss]

Another ask, if you have the inclination: I've just been rereading Reek III with all that entails, and Theon thinks about 'the son is just the shadow of the father' re Roose and Ramsay. Do you believe that Roose can actually be as bad or worse than Ramsay at this point? He's got to be worse than average and his morals very lacking, but it's hard to imagine us being made to abhor him more than Ramsay in the remaining books. Is it just Theon's terrified paranoia, or do you think it can pay off somehow? 🤔 Or am I misinterpreting that line do you think?

Do you believe that Roose can actually be as bad or worse than Ramsay at this point? He's got to be worse than average and his morals very lacking [...].

This is a trap, he is playing with you, the son is just the shadow of the father. Lord Ramsay played with his hopes all the time. - Reek III, aDwD

This is no man to jape with. You had only to look at Bolton to know that he had more cruelty in his pinky toe than all the Freys combined. - Reek III, aDwD

I believe quotes like these refer to the effect of the cruelty they enact, rather than the specific crimes.

Ramsay is vile and cruel, enacting heinous violence upon people like a slasher movie villain. We do not have any evidence that Roose personally inflicts the same degree of crass violence upon people, as even in his presumably candid retelling of the miller's wife story, while a horrifying and inexcusable crime, he does not reach the extreme level of violence Ramsay inflicts upon smallfolk on the regular with his hunts and torturings.

"Roose Bolton's cold and cunning, aye, but a man can deal with Roose. We've all known worse. But this bastard son of his … they say he's mad and cruel, a monster." - Davos III, aDwD

The point, i believe, is not who produces the worst feats of violence, but rather another facette of grrms criticism of feudalism:

Would Ramsay even have a chance to do these heinous crimes if his father, who knows about everything, had an ounce of morality in him?

[Roose:] "All you have I gave you. You would do well to remember that, bastard." - Reek III, aDwD

Everything Ramsay has, his high position, the freedom to do all the crimes he wants, the protection from law that would have otherwise sent him to the wall in no time, he has because of his father's selfishness. Roose could have stopped these crimes from happening, he could have given Ramsay the appropriate punishment, instead he keeps Ramsay around because he feels like it...

Roose is at the top of his society, answering to barely anyone except his overlord and his king; so much power is at his fingertips, and yet he uses it for selfish reasons, commits crimes, allows crimes to happen in full knowledge, and everything is handled as it benefits him instead of abiding to morality or law. Every crime Ramsay does is Roose' responsibility as feudal lord and thus his crime.

"When soldiers lack discipline, the fault lies with their lord commander," his father said. - Tyrion VIII, aGoT

Roose is called the leech lord, and indeed he is a leech upon society, bleeding his people dry to his own benefit while not lifting a finger himself. While he is not a literal vampire, obviously parts of his character are a play on vampire myths, and the aristocratic bloodsucking vampire is frequently used as a metaphor for critique of the ruling class (i hear Fever Dream by grrm plays with this, though i have not read it). He might not commit a Texas Chainsaw Massacre in person, but that doesn't make him any less morally bankrupt and despicable, and he still has the same blood on his hands.

There is a tendency where Roose tries to lighten his crimes in conversation - here are three examples showing different facettes:

"The arrogance of it! They do not expect the north to believe their lies, not truly, but they think we must pretend to believe or die. Roose Bolton lies about his part in the Red Wedding, and his bastard lies about the fall of Winterfell." - Davos IV, aDwD

[Roose:] "Tell me, my lord … if the kinslayer is accursed, what is a father to do when one son slays another?" - Reek III, aDwD

[Roose:] "The maesters will tell you that King Jaehaerys abolished the lord's right to the first night to appease his shrewish queen, but where the old gods rule, old customs linger. The Umbers keep the first night too, deny it as they may. Certain of the mountain clans as well, and on Skagos … well, only heart trees ever see half of what they do on Skagos." - Reek III, aDwD

1. Denial of involvement - Roose frequently either escapes blame completely (for example for Duskendale), puts blame on someone else (like blaming Ramsay's bastard blood for Winterfell), or lies about his crimes to evade blame.

2. Selectively invoking law - using the kinslaying law, he pretends his hands are tied when it comes to Ramsay, even though he could for example also send him to the wall as punishment. He frequently breaks laws as he pleases and also took part in breaking sacred contracts such as guest right (red wedding), so him invoking law in this instance is likely a tool to absolve himself of blame during the conversation.

3. Comparing himself to others to lessen his own acts, after failing to escape blame - by bringing the Umbers etc into the conversation, he tries to make himself look less bad; "look, everyone's doing it, and the skagosi are probably even worse than me!"

As opposed to Ramsay, he is aware of how the severity of the crimes he is doing would be received by others. He likes to present himself as a rational and civilized man, and thus has an interest to downplay his criminal actions, even if he does not see anything wrong with them as he did them for his own benefit.

"No tales were ever told of me. Do you think I would be sitting here if it were otherwise?" - Reek III, aDwD

"That annoyed me, so I gave her the mill and had the brother's tongue cut out, to make certain he did not go running to Winterfell with tales that might disturb Lord Rickard." - Reek III, aDwD

As the Mormonts were bannermen to the Starks, [Jorah's] crime had dishonored the north. Ned had made the long journey west to Bear Island, only to find when he arrived that Jorah had taken ship beyond the reach of Ice and the king's justice. - Eddard II, aGoT

The foolish Ramsay tries to pride himself in his crimes; Roose however knows of the importance of optics. He is aware that he frequently breaks the law, and tries his best to keep his reputation intact as to not attract unwanted attention; especially with an overlord like Ned Stark, who would not handwave any crime and would make sure justice is served.

From what we can observe, in my opinion the difference between Roose and Ramsay is that Roose doesn't see anything wrong with comitting violence as long as the result is of a benefit for him, while Ramsay additionally also commits violence because he merely finds enjoyment in inflicting it, violence for violence's sake. This is why Roose is able to control himself and always gives Ramsay the advice to be restrained, but Ramsay is unable and unwilling to do so and his acts are much more extreme. Roose is likely starting to realize this difference by aDwD.

Is it just Theon's terrified paranoia [...]?

I do also believe Theon's statement is fueled by paranoia, if you look at the entire context:

"I mean you no harm, you know. I owe you much and more." - "You do?" Some part of him was screaming, This is a trap, he is playing with you, the son is just the shadow of the father. Lord Ramsay played with his hopes all the time. "What … what do you owe me, m'lord?" - "The north. The Starks were done and doomed the night that you took Winterfell." He waved a pale hand, dismissive. "All this is only squabbling over spoils." - Reek III, aDwD

Roose is not necessarily tricking Theon here since it appears to be a correct statement; And he does have an interest to be on friendly terms with Theon (offering him fresh clothes for example) because he wants to make use of his position as heir to the iron islands, a goal he expressed as early as a Storm of Swords.

"Flaying Theon will not bring my brothers back," Robb said. "I want his head, not his skin." - "He is Balon Greyjoy's only living son," Lord Bolton said softly, as if they had forgotten, "and now rightful King of the Iron Islands. A captive king has great value as a hostage." - Catelyn VI, aCoK

"Serve us in this, and when Stannis is defeated we will discuss how best to restore you to your father's seat," his lordship had said in that soft voice of his, a voice made for lies and whispers. Theon never believed a word of it. - The Prince of Winterfell, aDwD

Note that here Theon does not believe him either, any trust he has shattered by Ramsay as well as Roose' unlikable personality. Still it seems likely Roose was really somewhat trying to be nice with Theon, because as he tries to teach Ramsay there's value in it:

"Power tastes best when sweetened by courtesy. You had best learn that if you ever hope to rule." - Reek III, aDwD

Do you think it can pay off somehow?

This is speculation, but i believe Roose' story is likely headed in the opposite direction - A Storm of Swords featured his greatest villainous feat, the Red Wedding, a showcase of cruelty and treacherousness. I do not think it will be followed up by an act of even greater cruelty; instead i think he will finally reap what he has sown.

Roose Bolton said nothing at all. But Theon Greyjoy saw a look in his pale eyes that he had never seen before — an uneasiness, even a hint of fear.

That night the new stable collapsed beneath the weight of the snow that had buried it. - a Ghost in Winterfell, aDwD

I believe the line about the stable is meant as a metaphor for his regime collapsing, as it is put directly after the line where he realizes the situation is growing dire for him.

It all seemed so familiar, like a mummer show that he had seen before. Only the mummers had changed. Roose Bolton was playing the part that Theon had played the last time round, and the dead men were playing the parts of Aggar, Gynir Rednose, and Gelmarr the Grim. - a Ghost in Winterfell, aDwD

Roose is likely going to continue the parallel with Theon as his arc goes steadily downwards. He is a foil to Ned; where Ned died but his legacy lives on, Roose will likely live to see his legacy crumble.

There is of course a possibility that he, when cornered, starts expressing more cruelty as a last-ditch effort. We saw the stable used as a metaphor for his rule in Winterfell; but there is another interesting detail about the reconstruction of the burned Winterfell:

Serve well, Lord Bolton told them, and he would be merciful. Stone and timber were plentiful with the wolfswood so close at hand. Stout new gates had gone up first, to replace those that had been burned. Then the collapsed roof of the Great Hall had been cleared away and a new one raised hurriedly in its stead. When the work was done, Lord Bolton hanged the workers. True to his word, he showed them mercy and did not flay a one. - the Prince of Winterfell, aDwD

Aegon the Conqueror had commanded [the Red Keep] built. His son Maegor the Cruel had seen it completed. Afterward he had taken the heads of every stonemason, woodworker, and builder who had labored on it. Only the blood of the dragon would ever know the secrets of the fortress the Dragonlords had built, he vowed. - Catelyn IV, aGoT

This is a crack theory, but perhaps Roose has something up his sleeve when it comes to the newly constructed roof of the Great Hall (a location that features extremely prominently through all of Theon's aDwD Winterfell chapters). Maybe he could make it crash intentionally to bury his treacherous allies or something like that...

I doubt however that he will do Ramsay-style extreme violence, i can't really see a reason and it doesn't appear to be his style. He seems more about cunning than flashy displays.

As always these are not PoV characters, so as long as we don't have a view inside their heads we can never say anything with 100% certainty.

[ariainstars]

Ben Solo - A Sad Star Wars Story

Warning: longer post. (And possibly, a few unpopular opinions.)

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For a start: I’m not here to say I like how the sequels ended with Episode IX, in particular the way they handled their protagonist.

It sucked, to say the least.

I am writing this because looking back now, I can hardly imagine how the authors could have wrapped up the sequel trilogy with the happy ending we expected.

Let’s start with that word: happy. Honestly, did anyone want Ben to be “happy” with what Rey has become? I did expect her to fall down the rabbit hole. We repeatedly have witnessed how aggressive and judgmental she is; and by all logic, she had to meet her own Dark Side in order to realize that she has no right to judge the man she first knew as Kylo Ren. The moment I heard Palpatine’s evil laugh in the first trailer, I figured he had come to pursue Rey, not him. Unfortunately, her moment of shock was short and she hardly learned from it; if anything, since Luke sent her right back into the battle. This scene may have been what fanbros expected from Luke, but honestly, it was ridiculous. It did not fit to The Last Jedi’s Luke and it did not do Rey any favor.

And: had Ben emerged victoriously, found his happy ending, how would the title “The Rise of Skywalker” be justified? He is a Skywalker by blood, but in fact he is a Solo.

  Wrapping Up the Saga

The sequels were received with mixed feelings from the start. Fans of old were angry at The Force Awakens since it seemed to say that history was repeating itself; that the heroes or the original trilogy had brought down the Empire but not managed to preserve peace. We saw them separated from one another as they once had been, disillusioned and worn out. Not the mention the wasp’s nest that was raised by The Last Jedi! If the Prequel Trilogy dismantled the illusion that the Jedi were perfect, the Sequel Trilogy definitively does the same with the Skywalker family. Both messages are clear for everyone to see, provided one is ready and willing to see them.

If Star Wars is a tale with a moral - and given its approach and the fact that it was handed over by Lucas to Disney of all studios it is - then the authors are trying since the 80ies to teach our minds to a compassionate approach on both villains and heroes. One of the main reasons why many fans dislike the prequels is that they expected to see the Jedi and Anakin / Vader being cool; they felt let down by witnessing the Jedi’s narrow-mindedness and Anakin’s strong emotionality. The affronted reactions to The Last Jedi were on the same line of thought. The prequels showed that the Jedi were not the good guys, and for the observant viewer this is already clear enough in the original trilogy. But it was only with The Last Jedi that the elephant in the room was finally approached.

Through Rey, The Rise of Skywalker makes clear that wanting to be a Jedi does not entail actual heroism but the conviction of being a hero. And Rey’s dyad in the Force, the tragic figure of Ben Solo, warns about the dangers coming from a child and teenager no one believed in as a person because everybody only saw his powerful potential.

The Jedi’s Failure

Neither Luke nor Anakin nor Rey needed the Jedi in order to become heroes. They already were good-hearted, brave and idealistic when we first met them. The Jedi ways did not make any of them happy; they learned to use their powers and employed them for short-lived “victories”, but they never found lasting peace.

Not a few fans have wondered how Luke Skywalker, who believed in his father despite all, could give up on his nephew that fatal night (even if it was only a moment of panic). Simply put: as strong and mature as he is by the time of Return of the Jedi, Luke suffers from a father trauma, and he desperately wishes for Vader to become Anakin again, his father, who used to be a hero. When he asks Vader to leave and come with him, it is not out of pure idealism but also a personal request. But Luke did not need his nephew. The moment he had at the temple was a personal issue, it had little to do with Ben’s strength in the Force or his status as Luke’s model student: Luke was afraid that Ben would be the end of everything he loved. Luke, Leia and Han were thrown together by a trauma bonding; Ben had no place with them because he hadn’t been through the same.

The actual tragedy in Ben Solo’s life was the bitter realization, over and over, that he was not needed by anyone (except for being abused, e.g. by Snoke). Ben desired Rey even before he had met her because she was powerful but unexperienced, and he hoped to find sense and belonging by protecting and instructing her. No wonder Rey’s rejection in the Throne Room drove him out of his mind with rage: it was another confirmation of what he had experienced all his life - that people can do without him. So he decided, bitterly and sullenly, that he could do without others as well. But over and over, he had to realize that he could not escape his want for connection. He kept hunting for Rey; and he was very conflicted both when it came to his father and his uncle, letting on that he did have an emotional connection with both of them although he didn’t want to accept it.

Ben’s tragedy was that he did not want to be special at all, and that contrarily to his uncle and grandfather he was aware of it. Ben simply wanted to belong somewhere.

It is an intrinsic part of the saga that a hero is never a hero “because he is superior to others for… reasons”: Star Wars does not bow to that cliché. Some people are born with the capacity to tap into the Force, but not all of the saga’s heroes have it. The morally good qualities a person has, the right decisions they make are not inborn but passed on, learned, communicated. In A New Hope Luke was saved by Han, to whom he had offered companionship and set an example by trying to save Leia. In Return of the Jedi Vader was won over by his son’s loyalty and sacrifice. For an average action film hero, this kind of attitude or outcome of his adventures would be unacceptable: a hero is expected to be triumphant, not saved by someone else. And I know enough fans who don’t understand Luke and prefer Han or Vader to him, who are both cooler and more predictable.

In film, where characters need to be introduced to the audience within the scope of minutes, narratives are applied in a way that the general audience gets them quickly. The downside is that this goes at the expense of nuances. Fans don’t like to see Anakin being passionate and stormy because as Darth Vader he was coded as brutal but cool; they don’t get Obi-Wan’s many mistakes because he was coded as a hero, or Yoda’s arrogance due to his status as a wise old mentor. The sequels brought this dichotomy to a new level coding Rey as the heroine although she has a bad attitude and comes from bad blood, and Ben Solo as the villain when his attitude is conflicted at worst, and who is the offspring of the original story’s heroes. The difference lies in their intentions - hers are good, his are bad. This is interesting because it makes us, the audience, question ourselves as to how and why we believe we can tell good from evil.

You could probably say into a megaphone that the Jedi are not the good guys who always win, that the Force is not a superpower belonging only to the Jedi and that there is no simple Dark and Light but that the Force needs balance: some viewers will never get it. I guess everybody feels the saga’s subtext on a subconscious level; but woe betide if someone like Rian Johnson brings it up to the surface for everyone to see.

  Narrative Key

One of the main reasons why The Last Jedi is so divisive is, I think, that its major theme connecting all of the others is communication. While the prequels told much about miscommunication or lack thereof, Episode VIII is packed full of beautiful examples of what happens when people actually manage to communicate; and even when they do not, they learn from their misunderstanding one another (e.g. Poe with Admiral Holdo).

It is a common but major mistake not to question the narrative key to a story. Many Star Wars fans believe the story is simply about the good guys defeating the bad guys, so they overlook the deeper themes of the saga and respond with outrage when the authors try to humanize their heroes, bringing them down from their alleged pedestal. It is e.g. helpful to know Joseph Campbell’s monomyth theory; to consider that a film saga is not the same as a TV show and that therefore if the characters go through changes these must be significant from one instalment to the next due to the time limitations; to watch a few films by Akira Kurosawa, in particular The Hidden Fortress, to understand the significance of a major event seen through different eyes; or consider the prequels’ parallels with legends, classic literature, or the Bible - Lucifer’s fall, Romeo and Juliet, the tales of King Arthur. Star Wars is a conglomeration of many narratives, from Western films to the Japanese to French fairy tales to Greek mythology to Shakespearean drama. Who approaches these films expecting mere “action” is bound to be disappointed. It is understandable, however, that if you are used to certain kinds of stories, you will assume that every story should basically follow the same lines, and you will have difficulties accepting anything that is different, or believe it’s just badly made.

I still remember the (sometimes vicious) quarrels I followed in an online forum a few years ago about a Japanese mecha anime who some fans by hook or crook wanted to fit into the structure of a French novel. Of course, those two narratives don’t fit together: no wonder most of the other fans didn’t accept that kind of interpretation.

The Phantom of the Opera’s film version of 2004 was largely a failure both with regard to quality and audience appreciation because it made a tacky Byronic romance of a story that actually is a mystery thriller, probably expecting that it would be more appealing that way. What the filmmakers accomplished was making the story flat and the characters annoying by stripping them of the drama behind the original story.

Filming Rebecca’s film version from 1940 Hitchcock managed the transition excellently maintaining the storyline of the original novel; but Daphne duMaurier’s book is a coming-of-age story, and who expects a crime thriller may feel irritated by the narrators’ meandering and detailed inner monologue.

Game of Thrones also could not culminate in “all’s well that ends well”. The last season was not well-made, but I think now that was not the whole reason behind the audience’s disappointment. The show always was very crude and included loads of horrific events; even the worst victims of the war, who seemed to have a justification for their actions and seemed well-meaning, at times did terrible things. It would be a misfit to apply a happy ending to a “sex and violence” narrative as with another martial epic, like Aeneid and Iliad. Who waits for happy endings ought to avoid this kind of story from the start. (Yes, I know, I should listen to my own advice - had I imagined how depressing Rogue One is, Star Wars fan or not, I would probably have skipped it.)

Stories of this kind can be dissatisfying because as an audience, we follow our heroes’ adventures, sometimes for years, and we usually want to see them to find their happiness in the end. But in all honesty: we should have imagined.

That is why I think it was naïve to believe that the sequel trilogy would lead Ben to a happy ending with Rey. I have read more than one fanfiction which irritated me at first, until I realized that they were told on the lines of Fifty Shades of Grey, or Pride and Prejudice. That may work well for a fanfiction, but Star Wars is not a mere romance. Even if there was a hint of the overture to Romeo and Juliet during the abduction: couples based on that trope are not destined to end well. I myself was hoping for a happy ending due to the fact that the saga’s rights were in the hands of Disney of all production companies; and giving that the Skywalker family is one of the most famous in pop culture, I was certain they wouldn’t wipe them out. However I was not quite sure how they would do that and make it convincing, and I was wary when it came to the assumption (which many Reylo’s took for granted) that the love between Rey and Ben would be strong enough to save the galaxy and give them a happy ever after.

When a guy is introduced by murdering a defenseless old man, letting an entire village be wiped out with practiced ease, going on with torturing another guy both physically and mentally and climaxing with the horrible crime of patricide, one can hardly expect a happy ever after for him; even less since so very little was explained in terms of his childhood and adolescence. Some viewers identified with Ben Solo and saw his abandonment and abuse issues; many others didn’t, and none of the sequel films really thematized them. That he made peace with his parents and died to save the girl he loved is sufficient for a convincing redemption arc, not to offer him a happy closure.

  The Trope That Comes Closest

There were a lot of speculations with regard to the trope Ben (Kylo) and Rey were actually modelled on. Romeo and Juliet, Hades and Persephone, Pride and Prejudice or Beauty and the Beast, and there were probably more. Rian Johnson is known for loving The Phantom of the Opera more than any other musical. I don’t think that’s coincidental.

- The phantom is disfigured by birth, Ben is extremely powerful by birth; and Ben also gets disfigured by Rey during their duel. (Vader’s sunken, charred face under the mask was, for a long time, how I imagined the phantom unmasked by the way.) - The phantom is highly intelligent and has huge musical talent. Ben was born with a strong power in the Force. - Both wear masks and look much less threatening without them. They also wear a cloak, and black clothes. - The phantom had committed terrible crimes both to protect himself and to punish a world which would not accept him. Sounds familiar? - In the musical we do not get to know how he became a ruthless monster in the first place. Ditto. - The phantom dies (or disappears, in the musical) because only the girl knew that he was lonely and unhappy and that he still had goodness inside him. She had forgiven him, but the rest of the world wouldn’t have believed her or forgiven him.

Both Kylo Ren and the Phantom are creatures who are at the same time terrible and wonderful. The normal world, populated by average people, cannot accept them because they are both too fascinating and too terrifying. In order to find lasting fulfilment, Ben ought to have found back to humanness. The phantom couldn’t due to his disfigurement and his criminal past; and though Ben loses the scar on his face, the Cain’s mark of the patricide he committed, his deed and his former status as Supreme Leader of the First Order never would have been forgotten.

“Yet in his eyes all the sadness of the world Those pleading eyes that both threaten and adore…” Christine in The Phantom of the Opera (on the rooftop)

  Heroes: Dynamic and Static Characters

A general rule of storytelling is differentiating between dynamic and static (also called “impact”) characters. A static character is like an anchor for others: while they live through crises, learning and maturing, this character always remains his old self and always stands for the same values. He may be misunderstood, opposed and belittled, he may lose the battle, but never the war; and after having helped others through their troubles, he usually is on his own. (Cue: cowboy riding into the sunset.)

Superman stands for peace and justice, Jack Sparrow for freedom, Peter Pan for the innocence of childhood, Paddington for faith in people’s goodness. No wonder they are so popular: it is familiar and reassuring to follow the adventures of someone who is always like a rock in a storm. Static characters are in essence childlike, two-dimensional; which is probably why our child self easily gets attached to them and may be outraged at the idea of them changing, or maybe (gasp) being wrong about something.

But George Lucas developed his saga along the lines of personal growth, and by exploring its themes: thankfully, otherwise it would have become as boring and repetitive as so many other franchises. To continue a story you can either make it dynamic, or press the repeat button over and over. The Skywalker men with their strong emotionality may be unusual heroes, but much more interesting than other, “cooler” guys whose actions are more or less foreseeable. So, I can understand the Disney studio’s choices. On the other hand, it is not surprising when fans of old get angry when their supposedly unalterably perfect heroes make mistakes: everybody wants to know that some things (or persons) never change. Even if on the long run, change might be for the better.

I think one of the sequels’ most important messages was that the Skywalker-Organa-Solo family failed their heir precisely because their mindset did not change. Ben grew up in another world than they did; obsolete political structures, dictatorship or rebellions did not matter to him. But his family wanted him to adhere to the ideals that had gotten them through the war against the Empire, discouraging him from searching and finding his own place in the world, a world that now was very different both from the old Republic and the Empire.

Whether a static or dynamic character is more relatable to the audience is a personal matter. Many fans adore Darth Vader, Leia and Han Solo etc. precisely for the fact that basically they always remain their old selves. Padmé also is a favorite, probably due to the fact that she does not change considerably. Anakin changes a lot, which is perceived as a sign of weakness. Some fans may relate more to Luke, who undergoes serious trials and emerges from them stronger and wiser, far away from the greenhorn he was in A New Hope. And yet Luke’s final decision to throw his weapon away before Palpatine is often perceived as weird to this day. It’s not “heroic”.

The outraged fans who ranted at Luke’s portrayal in The Last Jedi did not realize that Luke was doing something both Obi-Wan and Yoda, or the other Jedi for that matter, never had done: he took responsibility for his actions. In this context Ben was the audience’s self-insert, he was as appalled at Luke’s misstep as we were. Such a blow is enough to send someone on a lonely island to meditate about his mistakes for years, convinced that the world is better without him.

But for the action film audience, that is not acceptable. If you have a light sabre and the Force (an alleged superpower), what do you need responsibility for? You can’t do wrong if you’re the hero, right? Luke also was the only character from the original trilogy who underwent character growth, which makes it all the more ironic that the many, many critics who tear the sequels to pieces are fuming at how Luke could be so “defiled”. Luke grew beyond the person he had been in A New Hope; these fans obviously did not. Which is why the studios thought they had to produce The Rise of Skywalker in order to “appease” them and to give them the Luke Skywalker they wanted.

  Where Does the Galaxy Go From Here?

A conversation between my husband and me, about a year before The Rise of Skywalker came out.

Me: “I hope Ben Solo will survive at the end of the trilogy.” Him: “I do hope that, too. But they won’t give him a happy ending.” Me: “Why?” Him: “He killed his own father.”

I hate to admit it, but he was right. I’m not aware what ethics code is under use in the film industry now, but in any case, the horrible crime of patricide was done; even if it was under coercion, the son traumatized by it, and it ultimately brought him back to redemption. You can’t make a patricide, the former right hand and for a time leader of a terrorist organization a hero and give him a happy ending; in particular when you are Disney of all film studios. (Not to mention that he killed Han Solo, a very popular character.) And from exchanges with other viewers I am aware that many do not understand how Ben killed Han under Snoke’s coercion, and the implications that led him to kill Snoke: they believe he simply did it because it’s something an evil, power-hungry person will do.

Ben dying without anyone knowing that he was not a villain at heart and worse, leaving the fates of the galaxy in the hands of a young woman whom we often saw giving in to evil influences again and again within the scope of minutes was a dangerous turn. If he was but “a child in a mask”, Rey is a child who believes to be a Jedi. How is Rey supposed to be a heroine, with the other half of her soul gone? She and Ben fitted together perfectly because she had the good intentions but a violent attitude, while his intentions were bad but his attitude desperately conflicted because inherently good. Rey came from evil blood but was kind-hearted because she believed in her parent’s love. Ben was the heir of a family of heroes but did not feel loved by them, which made him lonely and bitter. What good is Rey on her own, even more so when at the end of Episode IX she deliberately leaves her friends and goes to a literal desert? The little girl inside of her is still starving for connection, and neither being a Jedi nor a “Skywalker” will appease her. She had to meet Luke to realize that he was a good man but still just a man; a lesson she didn’t quite internalize yet. The sequel trilogy wasn’t her story because her personality hardly developed. It was Ben who went through hell and back.

Films (and film sagas) have a determined length and as a film studio you need time to explore all themes, which in Star Wars are quite complex. The worst mistake I found with Episode IX was that it broke the Campbellian monomyth in favor of a Marvel type B-movie to appease the fans of old who had hated The Last Jedi. Which is understandable from their point of view, but went at the expense of quality. The Rise of Skywalker may have quenched the fire a little, but as a film, it’s frankly forgettable, and compared to the other films from the saga, I doubt that it will age well. Had the sequel trilogy continued Rian Johnson’s approach instead of putting a band-aid on The Last Jedi, it would have been good enough to make a cultural impact the way the classics did. If the sequel trilogy was meant to follow The Hero’s Journey, no one completed it: Ben died and Rey went into exile, and no one brought any kind of elixir or salvation into the world.

All of this is not to say that I have grown to like The Rise of Skywalker and that I am not disappointed about the ending, or no longer sad about Ben Solo’s death. I hope that the next trilogy will give him a second chance: I am still convinced that his ultimate fate should have been to bring lasting Balance to the Force. If I am wrong and his existence practically cancelled the past without improving anything, the whole saga loses its sense. I think that by now he atoned more than enough for his sins.

When I learned that Rian Johnson had negotiated his own trilogy after The Last Jedi, I remember wondering what it would be about. After all, almost everything had been said about the Skywalker saga, hadn’t it?

It hadn’t. I had naively assumed that like with Episodes III and VI, the final revelations were preserved for Episode IX. By now it seems to me like The Rise of Skywalker is meant as an appetizer for the next sequel. It can’t be that the studios unlearned how to make good films in so short a time after The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, also considering that everything else they made about Star Wars in between (Rogue One, Solo, The Mandalorian) is solid work and not by a long shot as flat as Episode IX.

The studios assuredly will keep their secrets as long as they can. The Mandalorian was met with huge expectations, yet nobody knew about Baby Yoda before the first episode was aired. Due to their depth and love for details, Star Wars films can be watched and discussed over and over, and the message regarding the necessity of Balance is still widely unknown or not accepted by the fans. If this is supposed to be not only an entertaining but also an educational tale, authors must give new fans room to get to know the saga, and old fans time to let the new ideas sink in. Lucas and his collaborators have taken decades trying to teach us that morals are not black and white. But still when The Last Jedi came out, the message was utterly hated.

Whatever Johnson’s trilogy will be about, it can’t be a part of the Skywalker saga any more: they are all dead. Even if Ben is brought back somehow, he is a Solo, so this time it would be the story of his own family. The Skywalker saga was basically Anakin’s, and by reconciling with a Palpatine and giving his life to save the woman he loved his grandson ultimately made up for his sins. The Last Jedi was a bold move; but what are “bold moves” supposed to be good for if they are not followed through? Apart from the fact that the sequels weren’t even exactly bold but drawing sums from what we already could see in original trilogy and prequels about the Jedi and the old Republic.

  Family Is the Key

Star Wars is a family tale. It is for families and it is about families. One of the most frustrating things about The Rise of Skywalker was, for me, that the “new” heroes didn’t make any kind of home or family of their own; and a Star Wars film or series never works without a father figure at its heart. I am sure Ben Solo was ultimately meant to be a father figure; the sequels couldn’t work without even giving him the chance to be one. Anakin and Luke both founded a family - one through marriage, the other befriending many different people. The third generation did not even get a chance either way.

“I believe that you are redeemed by your children.” George Lucas

In Star Wars, children always have to pay for their parent’s sins, and only they can make them atone. Which makes it all the more tragic that Ben is not a father; by this logic, only his child could have saved him, or an adopted one. On seeing the enslaved children of Canto Bight, of whom one is Force-sensitive, I was convinced that the sequels would be the children’s trilogy. (I might have accepted Ben dying had he saved and left them with Rey, who also is an abandoned child and so would have found a meaningful task.)

What the galaxy needs most are not heroes but people. Heroes exist to save desperate situations; lasting peace can only be made by normal people. With Luke becoming a hero in the original trilogy and Anakin a villain in the prequels, I was expecting Ben to find back to humanness. Since we have another trilogy to look forward to, I do still hope Ben will get another chance and this time he will find his happiness; but I also believe that he will have a long way to go before that. By the end of The Rise of Skywalker he is a hero, but in order to be happy he would need to learn how to be fully human, realigning both sides of his personality and healing the gap between them (the way Anakin couldn’t). And you don’t learn how to embrace your humanness quickly after having lost it within the scope of years and years. Ben wanted Rey because she was the only person in the galaxy with whom he could be completely honest. But being human also entails bonding with other people, not only with one’s significant other.

Ben tried to pull off the “bad guy” role and failed because it’s not in his nature. A lot of fans see him as a loser, because whether good or evil, a male protagonist is supposed to be always unfazed. The gentle, nurturing and emphatic personality that comes out in Ben when he is balanced is not that of a warmonger but of a peacekeeper: I see nothing inacceptable or emasculating in that. Unfortunately, who has Luke, Anakin or Han as blueprints for “real” men, won’t accept someone like Ben Solo. I hope that in time, he will be more appreciated, and that his life story will be a warning both for the audience and for the saga itself, i.e. that it is more to the point not to punish a criminal but to prevent him from becoming that way in the first place. Which brings us again to the topic of children and a better way to raise them, Force-sensitive or not.

Rey and Ben both are children with unhealed wounds. Their brief moment of harmony during the Force connection on Ahch-To was so powerful because both were speaking to each other’s inner child: Ben saying to Rey that she was not alone, Rey offering Ben an understanding he had not known before. Padmé also always saw in Anakin the good little boy she had first met; one of the reasons of the unbalance in their relationship was that he felt powerless to do something for her in return.

I think that the sequel trilogy of the Skywalkers wanted to tell us is that even if you save the whole galaxy, it’s not sufficient if afterwards you can’t support and protect your own offspring. When we met Han, Leia and Luke again, their personalities were pretty much as we left them; their mistake in handling Ben can’t have been something they actually did to him, the blunder must lie somewhere in their attitude. All three of them were traumatized by cruelly losing or never having known a healthy family life, so we must assume that after the war against the Empire, they tried to build a new world that would fit to their needs. But if adults build a home, they must do so thinking first and foremost not of themselves but of the ones who need it more than them. Children shape the future, not a victory of “good” over “evil”. And I find it interesting that the codebreaker DJ, who had such a pragmatic view of war, was also someone we met on Canto Bight, like the children. He was a traitor, but as everyone in the saga, even he had a point when he said that ultimately, wars are useless because they always flare up again.

“Good, bad, made-up words. You blow them up today, they blow you up tomorrow.” DJ in The Last Jedi

The last scene of The Last Jedi showed us a Force-sensitive boy sweeping an open space before looking up at the sky and dreaming about being a Jedi. I still believe that this scene’s meaning was “Clear the stage, it’s time for us - the children.”

The Jedi, respectively Force-sensitive creatures, must find new and better ways if they want to be advocates for peace and justice. No institution can claim to have a moral standard if it does not protect, nurture and encourage their most vulnerable and needful members, i.e. the children. Watching the prequels it is shocking to follow how the intelligent, brave and affectionate child Anakin could become the most hated man in the galaxy, crushed in the powerplay between the “good but narrow-minded guys” and the “bad but not always wrong” guys. Both his and his grandson’s dark fate could have been avoided, had it not been for the Jedi mentality based upon the conviction of having the right to destroy everything that does not (or does not seem) to line up with them.

The Star Wars saga told us over and over that power is not what it takes. The Jedi lost the Clone Wars; Vader was a lonely, bitter guy (not to mention Palpatine); Kylo had all the power his grandfather never had and it did him no good. Anakin, Han and Ben all were loved most by their women when they were at their weakest. And this brings me back to what I stated above: stories can be interpreted in different ways, but what about the message the author actually wanted to convey? If I am not getting it all wrong, it’s that compassion and not power is the key to everything good.

Episode VII and IX mirror one another, only VIII hints at a possible balance. Star Wars has a cyclical narrative; Anakin / Vader had his happiest moments and successes in his youth, while his grandson in his own youth hit rock bottom and committed his worst sins. If Kylo Ren’s destiny, as per Adam Driver’s words, is supposed to be the opposite of Darth Vader’s, how can The Rise of Skywalker really be the ultimate ending for him?

  P.S. What do you think, could baby Yoda and Ben meet? Then Obi-Wan and Yoda would be together again in a new way. P.P.S I would also like to see the Force, for once. I’m sure it’s not black and white at all. How about a rainbow? (Does anyone have Rian Johnson’s e-mail…? 😊) P. P.P.S. On the other hand, if the next film starts with Rey being pregnant and not knowing how, I might be sick… ☹

[douchebagbrainwaves]

OK, I'LL TELL YOU YOU ABOUT LANGUAGES

Surely that's mere prudence? Good ones, anyway. Where is the man bites dog in that?1 If you can't find an actual quote to disagree with the author's tone. I can usually be found sitting in a corner somewhere with a copy of the server software running on your laptop. Refutation. Talk slowly and clearly at the audience. When so much time that it was too late to change. I'm a fairly skeptical person, and their tricks worked on me well into my thirties.2 He had all of us roaring with laughter.

A name only has one point of attachment into your head. The first was called Traf-o-data.3 It made them hate working for the acquirer. I assume it's infinite.4 Half the time I'm sitting drinking a cup of tea, or walking around the neighborhood. Never say we're passionate or our product is great. I think, is going to have to deal with stuff like patents and investors.

2 of our software, or we're never going to make my life noticeably better? I definitely didn't prefer it when the grass was long after a week of rain.5 5% an offer of 6. Having your language designed by a committee for a mainstream audience, hyped to the skies, and beloved of the DoD, happens nonetheless to be a comeuppance for the west coast has just pulled further ahead. From what little I know about Java, there seem to be a place to work. Sun runs into trouble, they could release changes instantly. Amateur was originally rather a complimentary word. The problem is, people who propose new checks almost never consider that the check itself has a cost. In this case, working code means a working description in the investor's head. When you have actual first class functions. And, like Microsoft, they're losing.6 Over and over, I've seen startups we've funded snatched by west coast investors, not so much that they lack the appetite for work, but that it will make the people who run them.7

Technology companies made money by selling their software to be good for writing server-based software you can use any language you want. It may turn out to be a good language, it will go in one investor ear and out the other. A friend of mine cured herself of a clothes buying habit by asking herself before she bought anything Am I going to wear this all the time. My guess and Microsoft's guess, it seems is that much of it is unconscious. Every thing you own takes energy away from you. But a discussion today about a battle that included citizens of one or more of the countries involved would probably degenerate into a political argument. A DH6 response could still be completely mistaken.

If employees have to be over some threshold of expertise to post comments about that.8 I can imagine an advocate of best practices saying these ought to be considered from the start. The method of ensuring quality is also the same: Darwinian. I think that would work for any kind of special training. Smart investors can see past such superficial flaws. Language designers, or at least language implementors, like to write compilers that generate fast code. Well, that's news to no one. Most people don't really enjoy being mean; they do it for free. The presentations on Rehearsal Day are often pretty rough. So I think efficiency will matter, at least the harvest of reading is not so much; but anyone who publishes online. So I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. Few would be willing to claim that it doesn't matter at all where a startup is—that a startup has to make something people want.

But business administration is not what I remember from it, I doubt it would amount to much more than a pretentious version of u r a fag! It was supposed to be there at certain times. DH2 statements, as in: I can't believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion. Whereas designing programming languages is like designing chairs: it's all about dealing with future investors: how much money should they take and what kind of x you've built. Viaweb on $10,000. Startups So these, I think, is which 52% they are. The most common was some combination of a blog, a calendar, a dating site, and Friendster. It would improve the average startup's prospects by more than 43% just to be able to deliver more software to users. That's to be expected. And markets are usually centralized. I was being paid for programming.

Notes

Since I now have on the side of being Turing equivalent, but he turned them down because investors don't always volunteer a lot of reasons American car companies, executives at 300 big corporations found that three quarters of them could as accurately be called unfair.

Ironically, one of the things we focus on users, you've started it, this is a down round, no one on the client? In January 2003, Yahoo released a new Mosaic. After Greylock booted founder Philip Greenspun out of the next downtick it will probably not quite as harmless as we use have a standard piece of casuistry for this situation: that the money. Most were wrong, but I took so long.

Russell was still saying the same town, unless it was. You can have a quality that feels a lot would be lost in friction.

I don't want to either.

If idea clashes got bad enough, the best high school to be something of an early funding round. Part of the startup. Deane, Phyllis, The Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2005. For sufficiently small audiences, it would have seemed a bad idea the way up.

As Paul Buchheit adds: I should do is fund medical research labs; commercializing whatever new discoveries the boffins throw off is as straightforward as building a new, much more attractive to investors.

Wisdom is useful in solving problems too, e. Microsoft concentrated on the East Coast. I'm clueless or being misleading by focusing so much control, and FreeBSD 1. If the rich have better opportunities for education.

If you're dealing with one hand they take away with dropping Java in the room, you can't do much that anyone feels when things go well. For example, willfulness clearly has two subcomponents, stubbornness and energy. This argument seems to have fun in college is much smaller commitment than a nerdy founder trying to make money. The inhabitants of early 20th century cohesion would have for endless years of bank dependence, reinforced by the fact that the usual way will prove to us.

[okbyokaybye]

Kill the Cop in Your Head

Authoritarian Leftists: Kill the Cop in Your Head

By Lorenzo Komboa Ervin - Black Autonomy, April 1996.

It's difficult to know where to begin with this open letter to the various European-american leftist (Marxist-Leninist and Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, in particular) groups within the United States. I have many issues with many groups; some general, some very specific. The way in which this is presented may seem scattered at first, but I encourage all of you to read and consider carefully what I have written in its entirety before you pass any judgements.

It was V.I. Lenin who said, "take from each national culture only its democratic and socialist elements; we take them only and absolutely in opposition to the bourgeois culture and bourgeois nationalism of each nation". It could be argued that Lenin's statement in the current Amerikkkan context is in fact a racialist position; who is he (or the Bolsheviks themselves) to "take" anyone or pass judgement on anyone; particularly since the privileges of having white skin are a predominant factor within the context of amerikkkan-style oppression. This limited privilege in capitalist society is a prime factor in the creation and maintenence of bourgeois ideology in the minds of many whites of various classes in the US and elsewhere on the globe.

When have legitimate struggles or movements for national and class liberation had to "ask permission" from some eurocentric intellectual "authority" who may have seen starvation and brutality, but has never experienced it himself? Where there is repression, there is resistance...period. Self-defense is a basic human right that we as Black people have exercised time and time again, both violent and non-violent; a dialectical and historical reality that has kept many of us alive up to this point.

Assuming that this was not Lenin's intent, and assuming that you all truly uphold worldwide socialism/communism, then the question must be asked: WHY IS IT THAT EACH AND EVERY WHITE DOMINATED/WHITE-LED "VANGUARD" IN THE UNITED STATES HAS IN FACT DONE THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT LENIN PROCLAIMS/RECOMMENDS WHEN IT COMES TO INTERACTING WITH BLACKS AND OTHER PEOPLE OF COLOR?

Have any of you actually sat down and seriously thought about why there are so few of us in your organizations; and at the same time why non-white socialist/communist formations, particularly in the Black community, are so small and isolated? I have a few ideas...

I. A fundamentally incorrect analysis of the role of the white left in the last thirty years of civil rights to Black liberation struggle...

By most accounts, groups such as the Black Panther Party, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the League of Revolutionary Black Workers, American Indian Movement, and the Puerto Rican Independence Movement "set the standard" for not only communities of color but also for revolutionary elements in the white community.

All of the above groups were ruthlessly crushed; their members imprisoned or killed. Very few white left groups at the time fought back against the onslaught of COINTELPRO by supporting these groups, with the exception of the smaller, armed underground cells. In fact, many groups such as the Progressive Labor Party and the Revolutionary Union (now known as the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA) saw the repression of groups they admired, and at the same time despised, as an opportunity to assert their own version of "vanguard leadership" on our population.

What they failed to recognize (and what many of you generally still fail to recognize) is that "vanguard leadership" is developed, it doesn't just "magically" happen through preachy, dogmatic assertions, nor does it fall from the sky. Instead of working with the smaller autonomous formations, to help facilitate the growth of Black (and white) self-organization (the "vanguard" leadership of the Black masses themselves and all others, nurtured through grassroots social/political alliances rooted in principle), they instead sought to either take them over or divide their memberships against each other until the group or groups were liquidated. These parasitic and paternalistic practices continue to this day.

The only reason any kind of principled unity existed prior to large-scale repression is because Black-led formations had no illusions about white radicals or their politics; and had no problems with kicking the living shit out of them if they started acting stupid. Notice also that the majority of white radicals who were down with real struggle and real organizations, and were actually trusted and respected by our people, are either still active...or still in prison!

II. The white left's concept of "the vanguard party"...

Such arrogance on the part of the white left is part and parcel to your vanguardist ideas and practice. Rather than seeking principled partnerships with non-white persons and groups, you instead seek converts to your party's particular brand of rigid political theology under the guise of "unity". It makes sense that most of you speak of "Black/white unity" and "sharp struggle against racism" in such vague terms, and with such uncertainty in your voices; or with an overexaggerated forcefulness that seems contrived.

Another argument against vanguardist tendencies in individuals or amongst groups is the creation of sectarianism and organizational cultism between groups and within groups. Karl Marx himself fought tirelessly against sectarianism within the working class movement of 19th century Europe. He was also a staunch fighter against those who attempted to push his persona to an almost god-like status, declaring once in frustration "I assure you, sir, I am no Marxist". It could be argued from this viewpoint that the "vanguardist" white left in the US today is generally ,by a definition rooted in the day to day practice of Marx himself, anti-Marx; and by proxy, anti-revolutionary.

Like your average small business, the various self-proclaimed "vanguards" compete against each other as well against the people themselves (both white and non-white); accusing each other of provacteurism, opportunism, and/or possessing "the incorrect line" when in fact most (if not all) are provacateurs, opportunists, and fundementally incorrect.

The nature of capitalist competition demands that such methods and tactics be utilized to the fullest in order to "win" in the business world; the white left has in fact adapted these methods and tactics to their own brand of organizing, actively re-inventing and re-enforcing the very social, political, and economic relations you claim to be against; succeeding in undermining the very basic foundations of your overall theory and all variants of that theory.

Or is this phenomenon part and parcel to your theory? In volume four of the collected works of V.I. Lenin, Lenin himself states up front that "socialism is state-capitalism". Are you all just blindly following a a dated, foreign "blueprint" that is vastly out of context to begin with; with no real understanding of its workings?

At the same time, it could be observed that you folks are merely products of your enviroment; reflective of the alienated and hostile communities and families from which many of you emerge. American society has taught you the tenets of "survival of the fittest" and "rugged individualism", and you swallowed those doctrines like your mother's milk.

Because the white left refuses to combat and reject reactionary tendencies in their (your) own heads and amongst themselves (yourselves), and because they (you) refuse to see how white culture is rooted firmly in capitalism and imperialism; refusing to reject it beyond superficial culture appropriations (i.e.-Native american "dream catchers" hanging from the rear-view mirrors of your vehicles, wearing Addidas or Nikes with fat laces and over-sized Levis jeans or Dickies slacks worn "LA sag" style, crude attempts to "fit-in" by exaggerated, insulting over-use of the latest slang term(s) from "da hood", etc), you in fact re- invent racist and authoritarian social relations as the final product of your so-called "revolutionary theory"; what I call Left-wing white supremacy.

This tragic delemma is compounded by, and finds some of its initial roots in, your generally ahistorical and wishful "analysis" of Black/white relations in the US; and rigid, dogmatic definitions of "scientific socialism" or "revolutionary communism", based in a eurocentric context. Thus, we are expected to embrace these "socialist" values of the settler/conquorer culture, rather than the "traditional amerikkkan values" of your reactionary opponents; as if we do not possess our own "socialist" values, rooted in our own daily and cultural realities! Wasn't the Black Panther Party "socialist"? What about the Underground Railroad; our ancestors (and yes, even some of yours) were practicing "mutual aid" back when most European revolutionary theorists were still talking about it like it was a lofty, far away ideal!

One extreme example of this previously mentioned wishful thinking in place of a true analysis on the historical and current political dynamics particular to this country is an article by Joseph Green entitled "Anarchism and the Market Place, which appeared in the newsletter "Communist Voice" (Vol#1, Issue #4, September 15, 1995).

In it he asserts that anarchism is nothing more than small- scale operations run by individuals that will inevitably lead to the re-introduction of economic exploitation. He also claims that "it fails because its failure to understand the relation of freedom to mass activity mirrors the capitalist ideolgy of each person for their self." He then offers up a vague "plan of action"; that the workers must rely on "class organization and all-round mass struggle". In addition, he argues for the centralization of all means of production.

Clearly, Green's political ideology is in fact a theology. First, anarchism was practiced in mass scale most recently in Spain from 1936-39. By most accounts (including Marxist-Leninist), the Spanish working class organizations such as the CNT (National Confederation of Labor) and the FAI (Federation of Anarchists of Iberia) seized true direct workers power and in fact kept people alive during a massive civil war.

Their main failure was on a military, and partially on an ideological level: (1.) They didn't carry out a protracted fight against the fascist Falange with the attitude of driving them off the face of the planet. (2.) They underestimated the treachery of their Marxist-Leninist "allies" (and even some of their anarchist "allies"), who later sided with the liberal government to destroy the anarchist collectives. Some CNT members even joined the government in the name of a "united front against fascism". And (3.), they hadn't spent enough time really developing their networks outside the country in the event they needed weapons, supplies, or a place to seek refuge quickly.

Besides leaving out those important facts, Green also omits that today the majority of prisoner support groups in the US are anarchist run or influenced. He also leaves out that anarchists are generally the most supportive and involved in grassroots issues such as homelessness, police brutality, Klan/Nazi activity, Native sovereignty issues, [physical] defense of womens health clinics, sexual assault prevention, animal rights, enviromentalism, and free speech issues.

Green later attacks "supporters of capitalist realism on one hand and anarchist dreamers on the other". What he fails to understand is that the movement will be influenced mostly by those who do practical work around day to day struggles, not by those who spout empty rhetoric with no basis in reality because they themselves (like Green) are fundementally incapable of practicing what they preach. Any theory which cannot, at the very least, be demonstrated in miniature scale (with the current reality of the economically, socially, and militarily imposed limitations of capitalist/white supremacist society taken in to consideration) in daily life is not even worth serious discussion because it is rigid dogma of the worst kind.

Even if he could "show and prove", his proposed system is doomed to repeat the cannibalistic practices of Josef Stalin or Pol Pot. While state planning can accelerate economic growth no one from Lenin, to Mao, to Green himself has truly dealt with the power relationship between the working class and the middle-class "revolutionaries" who seize state power "on the behalf" of the latter. How can one use the organizing methods of the European bourgeoisie, "[hierarchial] party building" and "seizing state power" and not expect this method of organizing people to not take on the reactionary characteristics of what it supposedly seeks to eliminate? Then there's the question of asserting ones authoritarian will upon others (the usual recruitment tactics of the white left attemping to attract Black members).

At one point in the article Green claims that anarchistic social relations take on the oppressive characteristics of the capitalist ideology their rooted in. Really? What about the capitalist characteristics of know-it-all ahistorical white "radicals" who can just as effectively assert capitalistic, oppressive social relations when utilizing a top-down party structure (especially when it's utilized against minority populations)? What about the re-assertion of patriarchy (or actual physical and mental abuse) in interpersonal relationships; especially when an organizational structure allows for, and in fact rewards, oppressive social relationships?

What is the qualitative difference between a party bureaucrat who uses his position to steal from the people (in addition to living a neo-bourgeois lifestyle; privilege derived from one's official position and justified by other party members who do the same. And, potentially, derived from the color of his skin in the amerikkkan context) and a collective member who steals from the local community? One major difference is that the bureaucrat can only be removed by the party, the people (once again) have no real voice in the matter (unless the people themselves take up arms and dislodge the bureaucrat and his party); the collective member can recieve a swift punishment rooted in the true working class traditions, culture, and values of the working class themselves, rather than that which is interpreted for them by so- called "professional revolutionaries" with no real ties to that particular community. This is a very important, yet very basic, concept for the white left to consider when working with non- white workers (who, by the way, are the true "vanguard" in the US; Black workers in particular. Check the your history, especially the last thirty years of it.); i.e.- direct community control.

This demand has become more central over the last thirty years as we have seen the creation of a Black elite of liberal and conservative (negrosie) puppets for the white power structure to speak through to the people, the few who were allowed to succeed because they took up the ideology of the oppressor. But, they too have become increasingly powerless as the shift to the right in the various branches of the state and federal government has quickly, and easily, "checked" what little political power they had. Also, we do not have direct control over neighborhood institutions as capitalists, let alone as workers; at least white workers have a means of production they could potentially seize. Small "mom and pop" restaurants and stores or federally funded health clinics and social services in the 'hood hardly count as "Black capitalist" enterprises, nor are any of these things particularly "liberating" in and of themselves.

But white radicals, the white left of the US in particular, have a hard time dealing with the reality that Black people have always managed to survive, despite the worst or best intentions of the majority population. We will continue to survive without you and can make our revolution without you (or against you) if necessary; don't tell us about "protracted struggle", the daily lives of non-white workers are testimony to the true meaning of protracted struggle, both in the US and globally. Your inability or unwillingness to accept the fact that our struggle is parallel to yours, but at the same time very specific, and will be finished successfully when we as a people, as working-class Blacks on the North American continent, decide that we have achieved full freedom (as defined by our history, our culture, our needs, our desires, our personal experiences, and our political idea(s)) is by far the primary reason why the white left is so weak in this country.

In addition, this sinking garbage scow of american leftism is dragging other liberating political vessels down with it, particularly the smaller, anti-authoritarian factions within the white settler nation itself and the few [non-dogmatic and non- ritualistic] individuals within todays Marxist-Leninist parties who sincerly wish to get away from the old, tired historical revisionism of their particular "revolutionary" party.

This seemingly "fixed position", along with many other fixed positions in their "thought", help to reveal the white left's profound isolation and alienation from the Black community as a whole and its activists. Yet, many of them would continue to wholeheartedly, and retardedly, assert that they're part of the community simply because they live in a Black neighborhood or their party headquarters is located there.

The white left's isolation and alienation was revealed even more profoundly in the criticisms of the Million Man March on Washington. In the end, the majority of the white leftist critics wound up tailing the most backward elements of the Republican Party; some going as far as to echo the very same words of Senate majority leader Bob Dole, who commented on the day after the march that " You can't seperate the message from the messenger." Others parroted the words of House majority leader Newt Gingrich, who had the nerve to ask "where did our leadership go wrong?"

Since when were we expected to follow the "leadership" of white amerikkka; the right, left, or center without some type of brutal cohersion? Where is the advantage for us in "following" any of them anywhere? What have any of them done for us lately? Where is the "better" leadership example of any of the hierarchical political tendencies (of any class or ideology) in the US and who do they benefit exclusively and explicitly? None of you were particularly interested in us before we rebelled violently in 1992, why the sudden interest? What do you want from us this time?

Few, if any, of the major pro-revolution left-wing newspapers in the US gave an accurate account of the march. Many of them claimed that only the Black petit-bourgeosie were in attendence. All of them claimed that women were "forbidden" to be there, despite the widely reported fact that our sisters were there in large numbers.

"MIM Notes" (and the Maoist Internationalist Movement itself) to their credit recognize that white workers are NOT the "vanguard" class: yet because they themselves are so profoundly alienated from the Black community on this side of the prison walls they had to rely on information from mainstream press accounts courtesy of the Washington Post. And rightfully alienated they are; who in their right mind actually believes that a small, "secret" cult of white campus radicals can (or should) "lead" the masses of non-white people to their/our freedom? Whatever those people are smoking, I don't want any! I do have to say, however, that MIM is indeed the least dogma addicted of the entire white left millieu that I've encountered; but dogma addicted nonetheless.

I helped organize in the Seattle area for the Million Man March. The strong, Black women I met had every intention of going. None of the men even considered stopping them, let alone suggesting that they not go. Sure, the NOI passed on Minister Farrakhan's message that it was a "men only" march, but it was barely discussed and generally ignored.

The Million Man March local organizing committees (l.o.c.'s) gave the various Black left factions a forum to present ideas and concepts to entire sections of our population who were not familiar with "Marxism", "anarchism", "Kwame Nkrumah", "George Jackson", "The Ten-Point Program", "class struggle", etc.

It also afforded us the opportunity to begin engaging the some of the members of the local NOI chapter in class-based ideological struggle along with participating community people. Of course, it was impossible for the white left to know any of this; more proof of their profound isolation and alienation. At the time, despite our own minor ideological differences, we agreed on one point: it was none of your business or the business of the rest of the white population. When we organize amongst our own, we consider it a "family matter". When we have conflicts, that is also a "family matter". Again, it is none of your business unless we tell you differently. How would you like it if we butted in on a heated family argument you were having with a loved one and started telling you what to think and what to do?

This brings me to two issues that have bothered me since January, 1996. Both comments were made to me by a member of Radical Women at the International Socialist Organization's conference at the University of Washington. The first statement was: "I don't recognize Black people as a 'nation' like I do Native people."

My first thought was "who the fuck are you to pass judgement upon a general self-definition that is rooted in our collective suffering throughout the history of this country?"

She might as well join up with the right-wing Holocaust revisionists; for this is precisely what she is practicing, the denial of the Black holocaust from 1555 to the present (along a parallel denial, by proxy, of the genocide against other non- white nations within the US). Our nationalism emerged as a defense against [your] white racism. The difference between revolutionary Black nationalists (like Huey P. Newton and the Black Panther Party) and cultural nationalists (like Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam) is that we see our nationalism as a specific tool to defend ourselves from groups and individuals like this ignorant person, not as an exclusive or single means for liberation.

We recognize that we will have to attack bourgeois elements amongst our people just as vigorously as we fight against white supremacists ("left", "center", or "right"). The difference is that our bourgeosie (what I refer to as the "negrosie") is only powerful within the community; they have no power against the white power structure without us, nor do they have power generally without the blessing of the white power structure itself. Our task, then, is to unite them with us against a common enemy while at the same time explicitly undermining (and eventually eliminating) their inherantly reactionary influence.

The second stupidity to pass her lips concerned our support of Black-owned businesses. I pointed out to her that if she had in fact studied her Marxism-Leninism, she would see that their existence goes hand-in-glove with Marx's theory that revolution could only ensue once capitalism was fully developed. She came back with the criticism, "Well, you'll be waiting a long time for that to happen".

Once again, had she actually studied Marxism-Leninism she would know that Lenin and the Bolsheviks also had to deal with this same question. Russia's economy was predominantly agricultural, and its bourgeois class was small. They decided to go with the mood and sentiments of the peasantry and industrial workers at that particular moment in history;..seize the means of production and distribution anyway!

Who says we wouldn't do the same? The participants of the LA rebellion (and others), despite their lack of training in "radical 'left-wing' political theory" (besides being predominantly Black, Latino, or poor white trash in Amerikkka), got it half right; they seized the means of distribution, distributed the products of their [collective] labor, and then burned the facilities to the ground. Yes, there were many problems with the events of 1992, but they did show our potential for future progress.

Black autonomists ultimatly reject vanguardism because as the white left [as well as elements of the Black revolutionary movement] has demonstrated, it errodes and eventually destroys the fragile ties that hold together the necessary principled partnerships between groups and individuals that are needed to accomplish the numerous tasks associated with fighting back successfully and building a strong, diverse, and viable revolutionary movement.

The majority of the white left is largely disliked, disrespected, and not trusted by our people because they fail miserably on this point. How can you claim to be a "socialist" when you are in fact anti-social? How do you all distinguish yourselves from the majority of your people in concrete, practical, and principled terms?

III. Zero (0) support of non-white left factions by the white left.

I've always found this particularly disturbing; you all want our help, but do not want to help us. You want to march shoulder to shoulder with us against the government and its supporters, but do not want us to have a solid political or material foundation of our own to not only win the fight against the white supremacist state but to also re-build our communities on our own behalf in our own likeness(es).

Let white Marxists provide unconditional (no strings attached) material support for non-white factions whose ideology runs parallel to theirs, and let white anarchist factions provide unconditional (again, no strings attached) material support for factions in communities of color who have parallel ideologies and goals. Obviously, the one "string" that can never be avoided is that of harsh economic reality; if you don't have the funds, you can't do it. That's fair and logical, but if you're paying these exorbitant amounts for projects and events that amount to little more than ideological masturbation and organizational cultism while we do practical work out of pocket or on a tiny budget amongst our own, it seems to me that a healthy dose of criticism/self-criticism and reassessment of priorities is in order on the part of you "professional revolutionaries" of the white left.

If the white left "vanguards" are unwilling to materially support practical work by non-white revolutionary factions, then you have no business showing your faces in our neighborhoods. If you "marxist missionaries" insist on coming into our neighborhoods preaching the "gospel" of Marx, Lenin, Mao, etc, the least you could do is "pay" us for our trouble. You certainly haven't offered us much else that's useful.

To their credit, the white anarchists and anti-authoritarian leftists have been generally supportive of the Black struggle by comparison; Black Autonomy and related projects in particular. Matter of fact, back in October of 1994 in an act of mutual aid and solidarity the Philadelphia branch of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) printed the very first issue of Black Autonomy (1,000 copies) for FREE. One of their members actually got a little upset when I asked how much we owed them for the print job. In return (and in line with our class interests), we allied ourselves with the Philly branch and others in a struggle within the IWW against the more conservative "armchair revolutionary/historical society" elements within its national administrative body.

Former political prisoner, SNCC member, Black Panther, and Black autonomist (anarchist) Lorenzo Komboa Ervin credits the hard work of anarchist groups in Europe and non-vanguardist Marxist and anarchist factions in the US for assisting him in a successful campaign for early release from prison after 13 years of incarceration.

In no way do we expect you or anyone else to bankroll us; what I am offering is one suggestion to those of you who sincerly want to help; and a challenge to those who in fact seek to "play god" with our lives while spouting empty, meaningless rhetoric about "freedom", "justice", "class struggle", and "solidarity". To those people I ask: Do you have ideas, or do ideas have you? Actually, a better question might be: do you think at all?

IV. Bourgeois pseudo-analysis of race and class.

It only makes sense that the white left's analysis of race and class in amerikkka would be so erroneous when you're so quick to jump up and pass judgement on everyone else about this or that, but deathly afraid of real self-criticism at the individual or collective level; opting instead to use tool(s) of self- criticism as a means to reaffirm old, tired ideas that were barely thought out to begin with or by dodging real self-criticism altogether by dogmatically accusing your critics of "red- baiting". Clearly, it is you who "red-bait" yourselves; as the old saying goes, "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones!" Action talks, bullshit walks!

Some of the more backward sections of the white left still push that old tired line "gay, straight, Black, white, same struggle-same fight!" Nothing can be further from the truth. Sure, we are all faced with the same "main enemy": the racist, authoritarian state and its supporters; but unlike white males (straight or gay) and with some minor parallels to the experiences of white women, our oppression begins at birth. This is a commonality that we share with Native people, Hispanics, Pacific Islanders, and Asians.

As we grow up, we go from being "cute" in the eyes of the larger society, to being considered "dangerous" by the time we're teenagers. As this point is driven home to us day in and day out in various social settings and circumstances some of us decide, in frustration to give the white folks what they want to believe; we become predatory. This dynamic is played out in ghettos, barrios, chinatowns, and reservations across the country. Even those of us who choose not to engage in criminal activity, or aren't forced into it, have to live under this stigma. In addition, we as individuals are still viewed as "objects" and our community as a "monolith".

We then enter the work force...that is, if there are any jobs available. It is there that we learn that our people and other non-whites are "last hired, first fired", that our white co-workers are generally afraid of us or view as "competition", and that management is watching us even more closely than other workers, while at the same time fueling petty squabbles and competition between us and other non-white workers. Those of us who are fortunate enough to land a union job soon find out that the unions are soft on racism in the workplace. This only makes sense as we learn later on that unions in the US are running dogs of capitalism and apologists for management, despite their "militant" rhetoric.

Most unionized workers are white, reflective of the majority of unionized labor in the US; who constitute a mere 13% of the total labor force. This is why it is silly for the white left to prattle on and on about the labor "movement" and about how so many of our people are joining unions. That's no consolation to us when Black unemployment hovers at 35% nationally; many of those brothers and sisters living in places were "permenent unemployment" is the rule rather than the exception, and many more who find work at non-union "dead end" service industry jobs. One out of three of our people is caught up somewhere within the US criminal "justice" system: in jail, in prison, on parole, on work-release, awaiting trial, etc as a direct result.

In addition, many white workers are supportive of racist Republican politicians, such as presidential candidate Pat Buchannan, who promises to protect their jobs at the expense of non-white workers and immigrants. What is the white left or the union movement doing about all of that?

It shouldn't be suprising that the white left still preaches a largely economist viewpoint when it comes to workers generally, and workers of color in particular. This view is further evidence of not only your own deviation from Marx, but also from Lenin, by your own varied (yet similar) definitions.

Lenin recognized why the majority of Russian revolutionaries of his time put forward an economist position: "In Russia,...the yoke of autocracy appears at first glance to obliterate all distinction between the Social Democrats organization and workers' association, since all workers associations and all study circles are prohibited; and since the principle manifestation and weapon of the workers' economic struggle, the strike, is regarded as a criminal (and sometimes even as a political) offense."

In this country, the distinction between the trade unions and revolutionary organizations is abundantly clear (even if some groups like the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) still fail to make the distinction themselves) and the primary contradiction within the working class is that of racial stratification as a class weapon of the bourgeoisie and capitalists against the working class as a whole.

Yet, the white Left (along with the rest of the white working class) fails to see its collaborationist role in this process. And this goes right back to what I said earlier in this writing about the need for a serious historical and cultural critique amongst all white people (and not just the settler nation's left-wing factions) that goes beyond superficial culture appropriations or lofty, dogmatic proclaimations of how committed you and your party is to "racial equality". To even consider oneself "white" or to call oneself "white" is an argument FOR race and class oppression; look at the history of the US and see who first errected these terms "white" and "Black", and why they were created in the first place.

I remember last summer, around the fourth of July, I had a member of the local SWP try to tell me that the American War of Independence was "progressive". Progressive for whom? Tell us the truth, who were the primary beneficiaries of the American Revolution? You know the answer, we all do; only a total, unrepentant reactionary would lie to the people, especially on this point.

Howard Zinn, in his work "A People's History of the United States", points out how early 20th century historian Charles Beard found that of the fifty-five men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to draw up the US Constitution "a majority of them were lawyers by profession, that most were men of wealth, in land, in slaves, manufacturing, or shipping; that half of them had money loaned out at interest, and that forty of the fifty- five held government bonds, according to records of the [US] Treasury Department. Thus, Beard found that most of the makers of the Constitution had some direct economic interest in establishing a strong federal government: the manufacturers needed protective tariffs; the moneylenders wanted to stop the use of paper money to pay off debts; the land speculators wanted protection as they invaded Indian lands; slaveowners needed federal security against slave revolts and runaways; bondholders wanted a government able to raise money by nationwide taxation, to pay off those bonds.

Four groups, Beard noted, were not represented in the Constitutional Convention: slaves, indentured servants, women, men without property. And so the Constitution did not reflect the interests of those groups." (Zinn, pg.90)

Come to terms with your white skin privilege (and the ideology and attitude(s) this privilege breeds) and then figure out how to combat that dynamic as part of your fight against the state and its supporters. Your continued backwardness is a sad commentary when we uncover historical evidence which shows that even before the turn of the century some of your own ancestors within the white working class were begining to take the first small steps towards a greater understanding of their social role as the white servants of capital. A white shoemaker in 1848 wrote:

"...we are nothing but a standing army that keeps three million of our bretheren in bondage...Living under the shade of Bunker Hill monument, demanding in the name of humanity, our right, and withholding those rights from others because their skin is black! Is it any wonder that God in his righteous anger has punished us by forcing us to drink the bitter cup of degradation." (Zinn, pg.222)

We can even look to the historical evidence of Lenin's time. Prior to the publishing of Lenin's "On Imperialism", W.E.B. DuBois wrote an article for the May, 1915 edition of the Atlantic Monthly titled "The African Roots of War" in which he vividly describes how both rich and poor whites benefit from the super- exploitation of non-white people:

"Yes, the average citizen of England, France, Germany, the United States, had a higher standard of living than before. But: 'Whence comes this new wealth?'...It comes primarily from the darker nations of the world-Asia and Africa, South and Central America, the West Indies, and the islands of the South Seas. It is no longer simply the merchant prince, or the aristocratic monopoly, or even the employing class that is exploiting the world: it is the nation, a new democratic nation composed of united capital and labor." (Zinn)

Yet, the self-titled "anti-racists" of the left continue on with their infantile fixation on the Klan, Nazis, and right-wing militias. Groups that they say they are against, but in fact demonstrate a tolerance for in practice. Standing around chanting empty slogans in front of a line of police seperating demonstrators from the nazis in a "peaceful demonstration" is contradiction in its purest form; both the police and the fascists must be mercilessly destroyed! As the Spanish anarchist Buenventura Durruti proclaimed back in 1936 "Fascism is not to be debated, it is to be smashed!" There is no room for compromise or dialogue, except for asking them for a last meal request and choice of execution method before we pass sentence; and even that is arbitrary!

True, tactical considerations must be examined, but if we can't get at them then and there, there is no "rule" that says we can't follow them and hit them when they least expect it; except for the "rule" of the wanna-be rulers of the Marxist-Leninist white left "vanguard(s)" who only see the fascists as competition in their struggle to see which set of "empire builders" will lord over us; the "good" whites who regulate us to the amerikkkan left plantation of "the glorious workers state", or the "bad" whites who work us as slaves until half-dead and then laugh as our worn out carcasses are thrown into ovens, cut up for "scientific purposes", or hung from lamp posts and trees. You people have yet to show me the qualitative difference(s) between a Klan/Nazi- style white supremacist dictatorship and your concept of a "dictatorship of the proletariat" in the context of this particular country and its notorious history. So far, all I have seen from you all is arrogance in coalitions, petty games of political one-upmanship, and ideological/tactical rigidity.

Let's pretend for a minute that one of the various wanna-be vanguards actually seizes political power. In everyone of your programs, from the program of the RCP, USA to even smaller, lesser known groups there is usually a line somewhere in there about your particular party holding the key levers of state power within a "dictatorship of the proletariat". Have any of you actually considered what that sounds like to a community without real power? Does this mean that we as Black people are going to have fight and die a second time under your dictatorship in order to have equal access to employment, housing, schools, colleges, public office, party status, our own personal lives generally?

Look at our history; over one hundred years after the Emancipation Proclaimation (the 1960's) we were still dying for the right to vote, for the right to protest peacefully, for the right to live in peace and prosperity within the context of white domination and capitalism. Today, after all of that, it is clear that the masses of our people are still largely powerless; we stayed powerless even as public schools were being desegregated and more of our elites were being elected to Congress and other positions. The same racist, authoritarian state that stripped us of our humanity was now asserting itself as our first line of defense of those hard-won concessions in the form of federal troops and FBI "observers" (who watched as we were beaten, raped, and/or killed) sent to enforce The Civil Rights Act of 1968 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

As we have seen since that time, what the white power structure grants, it can (and will) take away; we can point to recent US Supreme Court decisions around voter redistricting as one part of our evidence. We can also look to the problem of mail and publication censorship in the US prison system (state and federal) that has come back to haunt us since the landmark 1960's first amendment legal challenge to the state of New York that was won by political prisoner and Black/Puerto Rican anarchist Martin Sostre. And then there's the attacks on a prisoners' right to sue a prison official, employee, or institution being made by the House and Senate. Give us one good reason to believe that you people will be any different than these previous and current "benevolent" leaders and political institutions if by some fluke or miracle you folks stumble into state power?

No "guarantees" againt counter-revolution or revisionism within your "revolutionary" party/government you say? There are two: the guns, ammunition, organization, solidarity, political consciousness, and continuous vigilance of the masses of non- white people and the truly sympathetic, conscious anti-authoritarian few amongst your population; or a successful grassroots- based revolution that is rooted in anti-authoritarian political ideas that are culturally relevant to each ethnicity of the poor and working class population in the US. Judging by the general attitudes and theories expressed by your members and leadership, we can be rest assured that it is virtually guaranteed that the spirit of 'Jim Crow' can and will flourish within a white-led Marxist-Leninist "proletarian dictatorship" in the US. It's clear to me why you all ramble on and on about the revolutions of China, Russia, Vietnam, Cuba, etc; they provide convienient cover for you all (read: escapism) to avoid a serious examination of the faults in your current analysis as well as in the historical analysis of the last thirty years of struggle in the US.

These are the only conclusions that can be drawn when you all are so obviously hostile to the idea of doing the hard work of confronting your own individual racist and reactionary tendencies. When your own fellow white activists attempted to put together an "Anti-Racism Workshop" for members of the Seattle Mumia Defense Committee, many of you pledged your support (in the form of the usual dogmatic, vague, and arguably baseless rhetorical proclaimations of "solidarity" and "commitment to racial equality") and then proceeded to not show up. Only the two initial organizers within the SMDC and two coalition members (neither affiliated with any political party) were there. Make no mistake, I have no illusions about white people confronting their own racism; but I do support their honest attempts at doing so. Here we have a situation in which an ideological leap amongst the white left in Seattle may have been initiated; yet, the all- knowing, all-seeing "revolutionary vanguard(s)" of the white left were too busy spending that particular weekend picking the lent out of their belly buttons. Are we saving our belly-button lent for the potential shortages of food that occur during and shortly after the revolution [is corrupted by the mis-leadership of your particular rigid, dogmatic, authoritarian party]?

V. The bottom line is this: Self-determination!

For most white leftists, this means that we as Black people are demanding our own seperate nation-state. Some of our revolutionary factions do advocate such a position. Black Autonomists, however, reject nation-statism [For more on that, refer to page 15 of any copy of Black Autonomy newspaper].

Regardless of whether or not the Black masses opt for a seperate homeland on this continent or in Africa, we will be respected as subjects of history and not as objects that the state, its supporters, or the white left decides what to do with.

The answer to "the Black question" is simple: It is not a question; we are people, you will deal with us as such or we will fight you and the rest of the white settler nation...by any and all means necessary! We will not be cowed or dominated by anyone ever again!

Too many times in the course of American (and world) history have our people fought and died for the dream of true freedom, only to have it turn into the nightmare of continued oppression. If the end result of a working-class revolution in the United States is the continued domination of non-white people by white "revolutionary leaders" and a Left-wing [white supremacist] government, then we will make another revolution until any and all perpetrators and supporters of that type of social-political relationship are defeated or dead! Any and all means are completely justifiable in order to prevent the defeat of our revolution and the re-introduction of white supremacy. We will not put up with another 400+ years of oppression; and I'm sure our Native and Hispanic brothers and sisters won't tolerate another 500+ years of the same ol' shit.

Ultimatly, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure"; that's the main reason I decided to publish this, as yet another humble contribution to the self-education of our people. The second reason is to, hopefully, inspire the white left to re- examine your current practices and beliefs as part of your process of self-education; assuming that you all in fact practice self-education.

Reject the traditions of your ancestors and learn from their mistakes; or reject your potential allies in communities of color. The choice is yours...

"It is a commentary on the fundementally racist nature of this society that the concept of group strength for black people must be articulated, not to mention defended. No other group would submit to being led by others. Italians do not run the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. Irish do not chair Chistopher Columbus Societies. Yet when black people call for black-run and all-black organizations, they are immediatly classed in a catagory with the Ku Klux Klan." -Kwame Toure (Stokely Carmichael), Black Power; Vintage Press, 1965.

via IWW

[heliumdish07-blog]

Lawyers in Alkmaar - Why You Must Get in touch with a Lawyer in Alkmaar

Content

The Keys To Making Online Law College Successful.

Advocaten In Nederland, Alkmaar.

Sign Up To Targetcareers.

Law Institution Professors.

Lawyers Workplace Appelman Alkmaar

Another interesting example is France, where for much of the 20th century, all judiciary officials were graduates of an elite expert college for judges. The study brought in a total of 155 feedbacks, that included 97 in law practice as well as 35 in business legal departments. Several, 43 per cent, worked in a firm or legal department with 2 to 9 lawyers and also many, 57 per cent, had just one workplace. Lawyers in private method normally operate in specialized companies known as law office, with the exception of English lawyers.

The Keys To Making Online Law Institution Effective.

Nonetheless, in a large number of nations, a law pupil have to pass a bar examination prior to getting a permit to exercise. In a handful of U.S. states, one may come to be an attorney (a so-called nation lawyer) by simply "reading law" as well as passing the bar exam, without having to attend law institution initially. Some countries require extensive clinical training in the form of instructions or unique medical courses.

Therefore, be particular that you get all these details and compare to learn which will certainly work for you. Due to the fact that they have spent a lot of money as well as time as well as initiatives right into making certain that they obtain to the degree of affection for clients, this is. In situation you need assist with conflicts or special Work problems linked to employment, this is precisely what you need. The very best law office will have work law lawyers Alkmaar prepared to be specific that these concerns do not swallow you.

I know companions in small metros at 20 person law companies clearing close to a $400k a year. A high quantity accident TV lawyer that just recently started I recognize removed that much in one backup situation recently. For lots of lawyers, practicing law in New york city is the supreme objective-- the most distinguished companies on the planet call it home.

Some territories have 2 sorts of lawyers, barrister and also lawyers, whilst others fuse the two. A barrister is a lawyer who concentrates on higher court appearances. A solicitor is a lawyer who is trained to offer and also prepare situations suggestions on lawful topics and can stand for individuals in lower courts.

Other possible work contexts include exclusive methods, law firms, federal government organizations, and also corporate workplaces. Possible functions consist of public interest lawyer, government prosecutor, internal company guidance, or public defense attorney. Physicians acknowledge the value in possessing equity investments in brand-new medications, medical gadgets and clinical devices. A few of them will have components of the health center where they function. This is one more area where lawyers appear to vary dramatically.

Ali Eslami, handling lawyer at Allied Lawyers is an extremely reputed name, proclaims years of hands-on experience in global law. So, irrespective of your needs and requirements, hand-in-hand with Ali Eslami lawyer Canada based, enjoy the very best legal option.

Many law students begin their expert training during law college via law institution facilities with not-for-profit companies. Working under the supervision of knowledgeable lawyers, pupils in these facilities take part in real-world legal obligations such as checking out situations as well as counseling clients. King & Timber Mallesons is a multinational law office with workplaces in 14 nations. Its predecessor firms consisted of King & Wood and Mallesons Stephen Jaques, formerly one of Australias Big Six.

In developing nations like India, a huge bulk of law pupils never ever actually technique, yet merely use their law degree as a foundation for professions in various other fields. Legal guidance is the application of abstract concepts of law to the concrete truths of the customer's case in order to advise the customer regarding what they need to do following. In several nations, just a correctly accredited lawyer may provide legal suggestions to clients completely factor to consider, even if no suit is considered or remains in development.

ABA regulation 1.8 permits business deals w/ customers though greatly regulates it. If lawyers took bigger risks with their occupations I believe they 'd see even more revenues though the majority of are threat averse as it's the most valuable state of mind in a career that sells danger allotment. I understand a late occupation insurance coverage defense attorney in 3 person law firm getting rid of ~$ 120k a year regularly.

A couple of countries prefer to show with designated readings of judicial opinions adhered to by extreme in-class interrogation by the professor. Many others have just lectures on highly abstract lawful teachings, which forces young lawyers to identify exactly how to really believe and also write like a lawyer at their very first instruction.

A lot more law colleges are additionally starting to use much shorter and also much shorter courses-- practically like Exec Education and learning for people thinking about specific legal subjects. So if you intend to discover one area of law you can currently do so in 6-10 week programs that don't need returning to school full-time.

The variety of lawyers used at the fifty largest Dutch law firms boosted by 2% to more than 4,400, in 2015, discloses new analysis. Development was highest in the leading 10 section of the law market, with a rise of 10%, accounting for practically 100 additional lawyers. I wonder if legal tech is guaranteeing for equity investment like med technology is for physicians?

The flexible career of consulting can enable lawyers to pick which organizations they serve. Consultants might help companies, not-for-profit organizations, governments, or specific clients. Lawyer tasks as well as work vary relying on job, field, and company context. Some experts largely supply lawful advise, while other lawyers represent customers routinely in court.

Have You Obtained financial disagreements or concerns in The location of tax obligation law? Also, advocaat alkmaar may get answers to your inquiries to assist you have a mind.

Both barristers as well as lawyers have gone through law college, completed the requisite functional training. However, in territories where there is a split-profession, only barristers are confessed as members of their corresponding bar organization. On-the-job training for lawyers depends somewhat on expertise, sector, and also job goals.

Tort regulations covers situations entailing mishaps, all-natural catastrophes, wrongful fatality, etc . The accident of individuals and additionally residential or commercial property damage may result from a tort insurance coverage case.

Caesar van Everdingen was buried on 13 October 1678 in the Grote Kerk in Alkmaar. His widow Helena van Oosthoorn provided several of the paints in her property to the Van Everdingen family members. She ultimately wed Pieter Gerritsz Lang, the sheriff of Bergen, near Alkmaar, yet the marriage ended in separation in 1687. Helena was hidden in the Grote Kerk on 22 June 1694, in the same tomb as Caesar. If so, do not shed the possibility to update your company's profile, add products, offers and also greater position in internet search engine.

Furthermore, if you're working with a firm that's bankrupt, you need aid. Reputable as well as professional lawyers are ready and also delighted to assist you in this area of lawenforcement. As a business owner, you can check out a law Firm in Alkmaar to aid manage all threats or perhaps develop possibilities. The most effective law practice will primarily be taken part as your attorney to guidance you regarding exactly how to resolve estates.

It will be interesting to see exactly how these need patterns alter the large law practice over time. I love your blog site BTW-- I am not a lawyer, however I am a high net worth Millennial and also appreciate your viewpoints. The very first university degrees, beginning with the law school of the College of Bologna in the 11th century, were all law levels as well as doctorates. Levels in other areas did not begin till the 13th century, however the medical professional remained to be the only level offered at most of the old colleges till the 20th century.

After one gains a law level, occupation flexibility may be badly constrained. For example, unlike their American equivalents, it is challenging for German judges to leave the bench as well as end up being advocates secretive practice.

Who makes more solicitors or barristers?

Solicitors have a more stable income but the top barristers get paid more than most top solicitors; although the average solicitor may be paid more. Add to that the one year barristers have to spend in pupillage/deviling and the risks of taking the barrister path are higher.

We have experience managing lots of top-level matters and also transactions in the Netherlands, consisting of working with pan-European issues. With our strong setting in the Dutch service neighborhood and our roots in the United States, we really are a Dutch law firm with an American heart.

Are you looking for legal advice in any kind of kind from the Alkmaar area?

The best law firms will certainly have labor law lawyers Alkmaar prepared to see to it that these issues do not ingest you in.

They make sure that you get all that's suitable based on the law.

You have to know that not all of law firm Alkmaar solutions could assist you if you do.

Advocaten In Nederland, Alkmaar.

During Safe's Yearly Associate Study, we asked associates who work in the Large Apple to rank the reputations of peer firms within NYC. Maintain reviewing to figure out the most prestigious law office in New York.

The sufferer may file a claim against the charged for the problems occurring from the tort. The regulations of tort consists of circumstances including negligent, willful as well as also untrustworthy activities and also suitables for damages as well as injuries that occurred from those activities. Most lawyers work for district lawyer offices, law governments, firms, or firms, however some lawyers run exclusive methods or work individually as consultants.

What type of lawyer gets paid the most in Australia?

What Type of Lawyer Earns the Most?General-In-House Lawyers came first, at an average annual salary of $128,988. Constructions Lawyers came second highest, at an average annual salary of $124,041. Corporate & Commercial Lawyers come third highest, at an average annual salary of $118,558. More items•

With the region of residential property law and residential or commercial property being essential, these legal aids will can be found in to guide you on clients, programmers, as well as specialists. Family law is established for issues associating with marriage partnership, fostering, child security, separation, splitting up and different other issues worrying relative issues. It manages the young people in addition to with the moms and dads along with their participation.

Lawyers seldom invest alongside their customers in transaction, neither do they seem to have equity stakes in company endeavors related to the practice of law. This is different than various other countries, like Australia, where law firms are noted on the public exchanges. I have had the opportunity to run digital advertising campaigns for a number of the top law colleges in the US-- both for their JD and LLM programs. There are some actually fascinating fads that highlight exactly how demand for law degrees are altering. First, rate of interest in JD programs has actually dropped significantly over the previous 5 years.

The term "medical professional" has actually given that fallen into disuse, although it is still a legal title in Italy as well as being used in lots of nations outside of Europe. In a lot of civil law nations, lawyers generally structure their legal education and learning around their selected specialized; the borders in between different kinds of lawyers are meticulously defined as well as tough to cross.

The vast majority of law firms worldwide are small companies that range in size from 1 to 10 lawyers. The USA, with its large number of firms with more than 50 lawyers, is an exception. The United Kingdom and Australia are also exceptions, as the UK, Australia as well as the U.S. are now home to a number of firms with more than 1,000 lawyers after a wave of mergings in the late 1990s. Subscribe and also obtain breaking information, discourse, as well as point of views on law practice, lawyers, law institutions, claims, judges, and also extra.

Sign Up To Targetcareers.

Just make your inheritance troubles known to the lawyer. Is it your desire to market Or rent out your company area or house?

Law College Professors.

To learn more, please go to Allied Lawyers site. Among the top global litigation as well as service law office in Canada, Fasken LLP has almost 700 lawyers spread out across 10 workplaces on four continents. Workplaces for this company lie all throughout Canada, including Toronto, Calgary, Ottawa, as well as Quebec. The company has worldwide workplaces located in Paris as well as London, in addition to a branch workplace in South Africa as well as China. With 180 lawyers, tax obligation notaries, consultants and economic experts, we provide Dutch and also foreign multinationals regional as well as cross-border legal as well as tax advice.

Recognized in the marketplace for our cutting-edge, pragmatic method, we aid customers confiscate opportunities, alleviate risks and fix complicated service, lawful as well as tax obligation concerns. Our office was the first Dutch law practice to join a multinational network and also develop an incorporated civil, financial and notarial method. In many common law countries, particularly those with fused professions, lawyers have many choices over the course of their careers. Besides personal technique, they can come to be a prosecutor, federal government advice, company internal guidance, management law court, law, court, or mediator professor. There are also several non-legal work for which legal training is good preparation, such as political leader, corporate executive, federal government administrator, investment reporter, lender, or entrepreneur.

Our clients value our capacity to understand-- as well as properly handle-- the interaction in between these needs. The difficulties our customers deal with do not fit with the synthetic boundaries of other law firms' practice groups.

Based out of Canada, Allied Lawyers is one of the fastest emerging global law practice, offering several high-profile customers. The company is in the expansion stage with offices now additionally in UAE, Iraq, and also China. In the context of worldwide law, it concentrates in varied locations, consisting of corporate and industrial segments, property, as well as worldwide trade as well as mediation.

According to this resource, as of 2003, there were 901 law office with more than 50 lawyers in the United States. Some nations, like Italy, regulate lawyers at the regional level, and a few, like Belgium, also control them at the regional level. In lots of nations, lawyers are family doctors that stand for clients in a broad area of legal matters. In others, there has actually been a propensity because the beginning of the 20th century for lawyers to specialize early in their professions. Some territories approve a "diploma advantage" to certain establishments, so that just earning a degree or credential from those institutions is the main qualification for exercising law.

Consequently, even conveyancer as well as business internal advise have to initially get a license to exercise, though they may in fact invest extremely little of their jobs in court. Failure to comply with such a rule is the criminal activity of unauthorized practice of law. In method, lawful jurisdictions exercise their right to establish that is acknowledged as being a lawyer. Because of this, the definition of the term "lawyer" might vary from location to place.

They ensure you obtain all that's best according to the law. You have to comprehend that not all of law company Alkmaar services can aid you out if you do. That is since not every one of these Alkmaar law office might provide you with the experience, rejuvenating, as well as proactive legal recommendations along with litigation.

What is considered big law firm?

Although the term “biglaw” is prone to some variance in usage, the most commonly accepted definitions would stipulate that a biglaw job involves working in a large firm (the definition of “large” can also vary; the minimum would be 101 attorneys or more) that pays attorneys the market rate for large firms (currently

With around 169 partners as well as 756 lawyers, the company offers a wide range of services ranging from competition, profession as well as regulative to tax law. Greenberg Traurig's Amsterdam workplace is house to more than 40 lawyers, tax consultants, as well as civil-law notaries. We suggest firms that are energetic both in the Netherlands in addition to internationally.

You can employ the solutions of lawyers in Alkmaar to possess claims collected. Seizures are imposed after an appointment with you by the attorney to make certain your financial obligation collection stand is clear.

[labyrinthresource]

Hello everyone!! So, this question doesn't strictly have to do with fanfictions, it's more like a thing I've been wondering for a while: Do you know whether it is possible for someone to write a novel (or any kind of book) set in the Labyrinth universe and get it published? Like for example recently a novel has been published and it is set in the "Arrow" world from the tv series. Is it possible to do the same thing for Labyrinth? Provided you recognise the original concept is Jim Henson's.

Hi there, mrsavereen!

I just want to preface this by saying I’m not a lawyer. The below is based on my own personal experience/observations and should not be construed as legal advice.

This is one of the ‘sticky’ and inconsistent aspects of fandom. My knee-jerk reaction is to say, no, but it would really depend on a multitude of factors. Being able to publish works set in an established universe seems to depend largely on the creative property in question (unless the work in question is already in the public domain).

I know Henson isn’t exactly averse to expanding the Labyrinth universe, but they are very slow to actually do so and seem to prefer to do so ‘in house’. I think the biggest hurdle would be getting their permission, and I’m not quite sure how you would go about doing so.

I know amazon was (is still?) piloting a program where people could publish completed fanfiction for certain series, and be paid, but this came with a lot of caveats, and only certain properties were eligible.

If you really want to publish your story, it might be safer, with far fewer legal hurdles, to convert it to an original work (Some of the ‘biggest’ examples of original works that have their original basis in fanfiction are “Shadowhunters” books by Cassandra Clare, and the infamous “50 Shades of Gray” trilogy by E.L. James).

If anyone else has thoughts or suggestions, please reblog or reply to this post!

[daazurebanana]

“It is so hard to be a normal person when one is not a normal person.”

Helping Mental Disorders

When I was a senior in high school, I went on a field trip with my English class to Salt Lake City to see a Sundance film. The movie, “Notes on Blindness”, was a true story about a man named John Hull who had a disease that took his sight when he was in his 30s. I remember being totally in awe of the way the film showed blindness, something I never expected to see or feel. Mental disorders are, in a unique way, a kind of blindness. Living with a mental illness is like living in a different world -- one that cannot be understood or lived in by the meager average human like me. Now, I don’t say that to offend, though offense is bound to be taken by someone on this planet, I will verbally stand my ground from where I sit on my couch. You, try as you might, can never truly empathize with me, and I likewise, cannot completely empathize with you no matter how similar we may be. Thus, really, we are all blind in a way. If this is true of two “normal” people, the divide is especially wide between a normal person and one with mental illness. Nevertheless, I don’t mean to imply by this that mental disorders should be eliminated or dismissed. I don’t think mental disorders should be erased. This is a research argument is it not? I merely wish to draw your attention to the goods and evils of mental disorders, whether someone else’s or your own; focusing on clinical depression, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, and anxiety as they are found in my family.

Partial Personality Disorder

  A long-time loyal social worker for a foster care facility, one probably wouldn’t immediately assume my step-aunt Sarah suffered from Borderline personality disorder (BPD). BPD, also known as an emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD). BPD is a mental disorder similar to bipolar in its propensity to mood swings as a result of abandonment and instability issues in their relationships, make being alone extremely difficult, causing extreme behaviors that tend to drive other people away. It includes symptoms like “self-image issues, difficulty managing emotions and behavior, and a pattern of unstable relationships. The effect BPD has on one’s perception of self and others creates many difficulties in daily life” (Mayo Clinic).

Her development of BPD was in response to the divorce of her parents. Her father and older siblings, while she remained with her mother . As she approached the teenage years, she showed increased symptoms of abandonment issues as is common.  She struggled with cutting, became very volatile, suicidal and promiscuous. The symptoms worsened as she got older until eventually, her mother admitted her to the hospital for treatment. As she became an adult, she was able to gain more control of her moods with the help of education in social work and the natural passage of time. Though Sarah does not mention her diagnosis in the memoir, as she describes the everyday niceties of life and the trials, there is a trace of something off-balanced about the way she describes people and memories which could easily be put down to the cancer she was struggling with, or simply exaggeration (Southey, Sarah).

Although Sarah is not a blood-relative, her disorder intrigues me. According to the Mayo clinic’s page about treating BPD, psychotherapy is the best option. With patience and willingness to make changes, patients could eventually learn to live in a self-reliant manner. Perhaps the most valuable lesson from my step-aunt’s memoir is that no matter when or how it happens, success is often possible. This doesn’t mean it is easy. In a rather hard-to-understand article I perused, the authors said that ‘it cannot be denied that people with mental disorders cannot recover completely and (the illness) will even hamper their productivity” (Agustina Barimbing, Maryati). Certainly, in my aunt’s case, for example, success was delayed by her disorder, but it was not stopped. Sure, not everyone can be an astronaut, but satisfaction with self and achievements is possible. This is possible for anyone by finding knowing personal limits and asking for help when needed. This is true of both people both with and without disabilities.

Bipolar

Memories are stretchy and blurry things, pliable to new information and experiences so I can’t give the exact order of the events of the year I turned six, but I do remember moving to Utah, my mom giving birth to twins, and my dad being admitted to the hospital. My aunt and uncle offered to watch my older sister and me, so we packed some clothes and drove for hours before arriving to be baked alive in the suffocating Las Vegas heat for two weeks (the equivalent of 2 months in kid-years). Being six, I couldn’t understand why I was with these people instead of my own family. Every night I’d sit on my bed with my 16-year-old cousin and sob fat tears as I made her show me how many days were left before I could go home. 

What I couldn’t comprehend at the time was that my father was admitted to the hospital due to a mental breakdown. It was the beginning of a recession and he had just lost his job, been injured in a car accident, become the father of (now) 6 children, and signed a new mortgage. He was thrown into a situation that would have been too much pressure even for someone without his struggles with a mental disorder. That episode was the first of many I can remember--the latest being last week, when he had a severe anxiety attack and was admitted for a week and a half to a mental institution that confiscated every possible danger, right down to his shoelaces.

My father has severe anxiety and bipolar II, meaning instead of having extreme highs and extreme lows, he experiences what is called ‘hypomania’: an emotional spectrum that has less extreme manic episodes and spends more time in the depression, resembling clinical depression. For a very long time I personally--and I am sure I am not alone--have had the tendency to interpret his reaction to stress as weakness. Reflecting on my six-year-old mindset, the belief that when presented with a trial, it is one’s own responsibility to remain strong and to protect those one loves--not to weigh them down, was incorrect. One of the main roadblocks to helping those with and without mental disorders is a difficulty “with self-care and...informing others of their needs” (Arredondo, Emanuel), and being sensitive to the needs for special support without bias is important. Such prejudices is society can be poisonous because issues that arise can’t be solved because the sufferer does not feel they can openly share their feelings.

 In society, vulnerability and sensitivity seem like signs of human weakness; something to be smothered, swallowed and overcome. But that is simply not true. It is true that mental disorders cause problems--to put it mildly. But here is a thought that a friend of mine put to me one day as I was moping around about something: “if it is inevitable, why not be happy about it?” That is not to say that anyone is wrong for being unhappy, but if it is inevitable, why beat ourselves up about it? Depending on the disorder, the reactions in our body that produce the disorder are different. One’s proclivity to having a disorder is not as simple as having one or not having one. In the article “Psychiatric genetics: back to the future," by Carson M. Owen and M. O’Donovan, it is explained that, although there are exceptions, disorders are a result of genes interacting with other genes or genes reacting to the environment. Gene-gene interaction implies that a person has the disorder no matter how the environment interacts with them, whereas gene-environment interaction refers to one developing a disorder as a result of a negative environment. But here’s the thing: both have the potential of disorder either way. Both often become apparent in teenage years to young adulthood when people are faced with a lot of stressful situations and decisions like college, moving away from home, dating, marriage, and starting a career. If stress is the catalyst, how can one a genetic predisposition to avoid a disorder? Although a perfect life is ideal, it is also impossible, as I have shown in the experience of my Aunt Sarah.

So much money and effort is spent on preventing and treating mental disorders, that the concept that mental disorders destroy is drilled into our craniums. But what do they inspire? There is a natural tendency to consider mental illness as something that is a burden. We have a tendency in our lives to see problems and try to fix all of them at once, but what we really need to do is take a breath and figure out what we can and cannot control, and from there press forward. Accepting our weaknesses is not the same thing as being satisfied with them. 

Dr. Jamison is a well-renowned psychiatrist who specialized in academic medicine and manic-depressive illness (bipolar). In her autobiography: “An Unquiet Mind”, she shares her research related to bipolar as well as her experience as she undergoes the same intense mood swings as her patients. Kay Jamison helps the blind to see, in a way (or, to continue my earlier comparison, she helps the seeing to be blind.) "An Unquiet Mind" (more than anything else I have ever read) helps a person on the outside looking in  to understand  the chaotic nature of disorders--meaning chaotic in the sense of "uncontrollable", not necessarily "manic".

 She relates having a disorder to the lifestyle of a blind teenager she used to counsel. Having met with him for many months, she felt she understood what it was like to be blind; however, one day she came to see him in class and was shocked to see that the room was totally dark, while he and the rest of the class were sitting quietly listening to a recording. This experience made her realize that she really did not know what is meant to be blind. We cannot fully understand what it is like to live with another's disorder, but Dr. Jamison says that we can love them and just be with them. The diversity of every single human ‘bean’s’ perspective adds spice to the whole of the culture. Our culture is profoundly influenced by the positives of mental illness. Bipolar disorder and depression are linked to creativity and productivity--many poets, writers, actors, singers, and other artists have made significant contributions to society. Take Dostoyevsky and Van Gogh (and my own father who has written 9 novels, a chemistry, and a computer textbook, makes cheese, is a blacksmith, a lapidarist...you get the picture).

As I have said, I don’t think the mental disorder is completely bad, but it does include some inherent and devastating problems. Some of the downsides of bipolar and depression include suicide, psychosis, abuse of others, loss of productivity and meaning, among others. In order to treat, or even better, prevent the negative effects of mental disorders, there are many resources available for both those who struggle with it personally and those who are affected, such as family and friends. Mental disorders make a person turn emotionally inward and become isolated although what they really need is a source to provide energy and emotional support, or in other words, provide energy and hope that life really is worth living. “To supply this demand”, it is “essential in these contexts to build social networks and the provision of social support”(Batistela Vicente, Jéssica).

Mental health issues are best handled by having some sort of structure in place. This structure can be found in multiple places: non-profit support groups for mental illness such as Conflict Prevention and Resolution--Brazil (CPR), National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), or Omotenashi--Family Experiences Learning Program (FELP), organized religion, or extended family and friends. More often than not, a combination of a few is the most successful in creating a constant safety net. Having these resources when “facing difficulties such as time investment; economic dependency, deprivation of the needs of other family members, lack of social activities and reduction of relations with the outside world,” give much-needed stability and prevent feelings of isolation.

Some form of organization especially helps children, as they are often too young to recognize their own need for support. Research has found time and time again that a church community --unpresuming but always available-- is the optimal choice, with mental and emotional disorders, having much lower rates among young adults who were raised in homogeneous religion-based home. Religion is what saved my father’s life despite numerous trials with his anxiety throughout the years. In the study done by CPR in Brazil, one mother of a child with a mental disorder said: “I would listen, would ask for support, I have always asked assistance from God”. Having a personal relationship with a higher being provides comfort when family and friends are unavailable. As with any child, having a “scaffolding on which to hang one’s life” offers direction in the long run, whereas a child who doesn’t go to church, for example, bases their morals off their parents but does not have the benefit of a social support system. In the case of non-religious people, participating in NAMI or school groups are ideal (Batistela Vicente, Jéssica).

 It is important to note that in the case of serious mental disorders, often social support is insufficient and requires the aid of medication. Modern medicine, though often abused, as I am well aware of from my time spent training as a pharmacy technician, is necessary for those who struggle seriously with mental illness. The importance of medicine and the fact that there is no shame in it is also the knowledge that I think should be more widespread—with caution. I took medicine for ADHD when I was about 10, and the results were great, but I only used it for a while in order to establish good habits. This may be the case for minor diagnoses like mine, medicine was not necessary but was helpful for my schooling. Serious mental disorders like bipolar, severe anxiety, and clinical depression, however, may require more than a short term prescription for establishing habits. One point Dr. Jamison emphasizes is that if she was given the option to go back and live a life without manic-depressive illness, she would not; granted the medicine was still available.  

I have come eventually to realize that just because something appears wrong doesn’t mean I have to fix it. Mental health can be treated and cared for, but in chronic and genetic situations, though it might be subdued many people don’t realize that it cannot be cured. And this is okay. As the quote says, the mental disorder will “hamper [the individual’s and their friends and family’s] productivity” (Agustina Barimbing, Maryati). I believe this is true not only but specifically when the individual’s relations try to fix them. This puts a strain on everyone and only leads to everyone involved blaming each other and themselves. 

“Oh mother, how is it for you?”

(Hull, John)

At an emotional scene from the movie “Notes on Blindness,” John Hull’s wife reflected on her husband’s wrestle with his loss of sight and with it so many other things and mused: “Shall I scratch my eyes out, shall I follow you into this world?” Those with mental disorders are not the only ones affected by it. Family and friends struggle to help their loved ones but can easily become discouraged by the task of relieving the load. Caring for a loved one with mental illness is often a“lonely battle”(Kageyama, Masako). Families are required to learn to live with the disease, facing the difficulties and adapting to the new situation in order to maintain a difficult balance within the family. It can be very isolating and caregivers sometimes sacrifice their own physical and mental well being and that of other loved ones to help the person with a mental disorder. Aid from the same support programs offer comfort and understanding by “address(ing) members’ need for knowledge about mental illness, reduc(ing) their feelings of guilt and self‐blame, decreas(ing) caregivers’ burdens, help(ing) families cope, and improv(ing) parent-child relationships” (Kageyama, Masako). With a community that understands the family members as well as the individual with the mental disorder, feelings of isolation and pressure subside, relationships are healthier.

In the book by Jane Clayson Johnson, "Silent Souls Weeping: Depression, Sharing Stories Finding Hope", Johnson interviews the husband of a woman with clinical depression who shares how his view of and reactions to his wife’s episodes evolved over the years. At first, he did not feel like family, but someone that was obligated to serve hand and foot. He got caught in a vicious cycle of blaming her for not controlling herself and blaming himself for not being able to fix it. Eventually, he realized casting blaming only dug the pit of depression deeper. 

So he did what is unarguably easier said than done, and decided to stop blaming people and start “blaming the illness”. Of the experience he said:"(life with) a person with a mental illness is not doomed to be miserable", it is the responsibility and blame that we stubbornly hold on to that make us miserable. Instead of holding on to virulent bitterness and letting the illness be a barrier, he decided to love his wife. The overarching theme of "An Unquiet Mind" and "Silent Souls Weeping" is the saving grace of simply loving those struggling with some disorder: not because it miraculously relieves them of the symptoms,  but because it makes life “worth living”. 

The simplest, and yet two of the most beneficial treatment are both education and acceptance. Mental disorders are not a project that can be “fixed”(Clayson Johnson, Johnson) by the experiencer or their loved ones, but one can offer love and can educate themselves. Though undoubtedly necessary for some individuals on a case by case scenario, it would do the most good for both sides to familiarize themselves with the other person’s situation. This creates a kinship of sorts, humanizes others. Just like when you meet the person who will be your best friend the first time you see them, we should not make assumptions but instead, make an effort to understand. The teaching that losing oneself to find oneself is absolutely correct. Love is a treatment in itself.

Works Cited

Agustina Barimbing, Maryati, et al .“Family Atmosphere Make Family Resilience Which Have Adolescent with Mental Disorder (According to “Resilience” Theory of Haase & Peterson)”. International Journal of Nursing Education. July 2019. 1.

Arredondo, Emanuel, et al. “The Global Impact of Intellectual Disability and Other Mental Disorders in Children”. International Journal of Childbirth Education. 2019, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p14-17.

Batistela Vicente, Jéssica, et al. “Mental disorder in childhood: family structure and their social relations”. Escola Anna Nery Revista de Enfermagem. vol. 19, 2015, pp 107-114.

Burland, Joyce. “NAMI: Family to Family Education Program”. NAMI. 2001.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/borderline-personality-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20370237

Johnson, Jane Clayson. "Silent Souls Weeping: Depression, Sharing Stories Finding Hope". Desert Book. 2018. 

Kugelmass, Heather. “Mental disorder among nonreligious adolescents”. Mental Health, Religion & Culture (MENT HEALTH RELIGION CULT). 2015, vol. 18, issue 5.

Kageyama, Masako, et al. “Changes in Families' Caregiving Experiences through Involvement as Participants then Facilitators in a Family Peer-Education Program for Mental Disorders in Japan”. Family Process. 2017, vol. 56 Issue 2, p408.

Lucille Southey, Sarah. “Sarah Lucille Southey: A Memoir”. Dollison Road Books. 2016.

Middleton, Peter, et al. “Notes on Blindness”. 2016

Owen, M., Cardno, A. & O'Donovan, M. "Psychiatric genetics: back to the future". Mol Psychiatry, vol 5, 2000, pp 22–31.

[headlesssamurai]

Has everyone asked you about Jupiter Ascending?

@godzillaapproved

Yo, I ought to apologize to you for taking hella long to properly respond to this. It’s holiday season over thisaway, sure, but I ain’t nearly vain enough to assume just anybody gets why that can suck up a dude’s time. Reckon I’m sure there’s tons of national celebrations all over the world I’d never know about otherwise. Bah, I say! Going out and socializing is one of the few things more overrated than all those shitty Apple products. But yeh, in my case it was less the celebratory spirit of holiday festivities and more a sudden spike in workload, so my mental energy was roughed up by that, plus I was doing a new workout at the same time. Thus, whatever free time I had left was spent obsessively hammering away at the Steam sale items I’d recently bought. It’s like a coping mechanism. Well, that and cheap wine anyhow.

Regardless, regardless—holy shit what an obnoxious fucking way for me to open this up—this Ask of yours came at an unusually coincidental time. A friend and I have been meeting up every weekend to watch like semi-recent crappy movies just as a way to enjoy a bad drink and a good laugh. She likes to laugh, and I like to drink, so it works out. After working our way through every Transformers film by Michael Bay, then Cameron’s Avatar, Terminator: Genisys, The Amazing Spider-mans, Spielberg’s Crystal Skull, Ready Player One, and some of the more abysmal DC films, our last escapade into nonsense was the estimably hilarious Gods of Egypt, which reminded me of one of those excremental quicktime-event video games. You know, like Detroit Becomes Human or some shit like that (Oh wait, is it Detroit Coming of the Humans? Meh).

As luck would have it, like, the day before you asked me about it, the next film at which I suggested we take a crack was the Wachowskis’ own Jupiter Ascending, which my friend had not seen at that time. Nor had I, since first viewing it in theaters.

>>SPOILER WARNING: IF YOU CARE ENOUGH TO, UH… YOU KNOW, CARE

I was intrigued to give this movie another go. It’s struck me that I’ve got an odd streak of pleasantly enjoying movies a lot of people can’t seem to stand, or which some people even hate with utter vileness on the verge of hunting down the producers with a roll of duct tape, power tools, jugs of petrol, and a matchbook. I’ve enjoyed, for instance, Hardcore Henry, Elysium, and Joseph Kosinski’s Oblivion, all of which not one person I know in real life could offer a single word of kindness. After my first viewing of Jupiter Ascending, I was left to consider whether or not it was the sort of movie I should enjoy and allow others to hate and disparage, or if it just wasn’t that good. I recalled leaving the theater with a sort of “Hm” sound, and not much else. But given my history with rooting for an underdog, was I wrong? Is this movie actually good, or cool in some way? I couldn’t defy the sensation that I’d missed something.

The answer, it seems, is more complex than a simple yes or no. Then again, as Mason and Goat Han Solo often remind us, “there’s no nuance on the internet”, so even my assertion there about complexity may be in gross error.

For the unfamiliar, Jupiter Ascending is a science fiction tale with vibes of less-cliché aesthetic choices for its visuals, some cool references to UFO conspiracy theories, and aims at a more expansive universe that would no doubt have been further explored in sequels had this film been better received by audiences and critics. I’ll say outright, it’s a disappointment to me that we weren’t given the chance to see more films in this mythology, because there’s some really cool stuff going on in this weird, imaginative universe. The story centers upon the character of Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis), an average working-class young woman in Chicago who is shocked to discover not only that aliens exist but that she happens to be the reincarnation of a galaxy owning empress, which entitles Jupiter to ownership of a large portion of the cosmos, the least part of which is Earth itself. But as the Aussies say, something’s a bit suss about the whole affair, and the wondrous glamour of this technologically advanced universe is concurrently party to a dark truth.

An immediately intriguing element of Jupiter Ascending is its attempt to set-up something which, while perhaps greatly inspired by a few other fictional works, is an original property, not a sequel, reboot, adaptation of an existing work, nor a spiritual successor to something else. Rather than merely being intrigued by this fact, I also respect it, because high-concept science fiction films aren’t something a studio likes to go for unless they have a preexisting audience, like adaptations of a book series or something. So it’s always bold when someone can cobble together the resources to really take a chance on something like this, even if it isn’t well received. After all that’s how films like The Matrix, The Terminator, Ridley Scott’s Alien, George Lucas’ Star Wars, and John McTiernan’s Predator come to be in the first place. Another example, I didn’t quite enjoy The Last Witch Hunter, but I recall respecting that film’s risk in its attempt at a new property for similar reasons.

Irrespective of your own personal tastes as a moviegoer and consumer of science fiction, it can’t be denied that the Wachowski’s are measurably talented filmmakers. Their doubtless skill at framing shots, blending effects with reality to present an integrated experience, and choreographing action sequences with such lethal precision it’s always incredible to watch; all of these things can’t be argued, and this attentiveness for the craft is all very present in Jupiter Ascending. Toward the beginning of the movie, there’s an aerial chase sequence that promptly accelerates into one of the most engaging, gripping action sequences in memory, heavily fantastical sci-fi elements intermixed with almost Fast and the Furious levels of insanity. The sense of gripping speed alone as two characters cling to the outer hull of a spacecraft was helplessly intense and left me quite keen to see what else the movie had to offer further down the line.

Additionally we have some awesome art design and stylistic choices regarding the look of this sci-fi universe, both the appearance of aliens and the design of their technology was familiar and unique at the same time. There are beings referred to as “Splices” which are intermixes of humans and various animals, giving some people bestial characteristics which are just weird enough to be cool to me without verging over the edge into absurd territory. There are cybernetic enhancements, gravity boots, phalanx style energy shields, neural synthetic wings, motherfucking jet-bikes of course and, though I never would have dreamed, motherfucking lizardmen! That blew me away, dude. Others may think it’s stupid, but lizardmen are one of my favorite sci-fi/fantasy creatures of all time, and they look so badass in this movie it was unbelievably awesome to realize I was actually seeing a proper lizardfolk on screen. With lizardmen and jet-bikes, Jupiter Ascending quickly marks two-out-of-five on my Generally Awesome Things I Like To See In Science Fiction list. It’s a real list, in my head, I swear.

The starship designs were inspired by art deco architecture in cities like Chicago, lending Jupiter’s cosmos a feeling more of Herbert’s Dune-iverse than something like Star Trek, which I appreciated since we don’t see that type of style quite as much. Top all that off with a fantastic score from Michael Giacchino and you’ve got some great tools to tell an awesome story.

So the thing is, it’s not just skin deep either, while the film does lean heavily on its visuals and action set-pieces, this is a genuinely interesting universe. Michael Bay’s Transformers, for instance, also has cool visuals, some passable action scenes, and dazzling special effects, but is it interesting? The answer is no. Because Bay’s movies, while briefly entertaining, are ultimately hollow. There aren’t any subdermal layers beneath the facade of spectacle. But in Jupiter Aescending there’s clearly something else going on, the touch of true filmmakers for one, yet also the potential for so much more. The groundwork, the craftsmanship and attentiveness is all here. It’s really what they choose to do, or not do, with that potential which ends up disappointing. Not, as in the case of Bay’s movies, the utter lack of potential for greatness from the start.

Though some fandom-card carrying ideologues may acerbically disagree, an acceptably comparable film whose potential for greatness was also mostly wasted for middle-of-the-road mediocrity is the recent Solo: A Star Wars Story, by Disney Interactive– I mean, by Disney behind the appropriated guise of Lucasfilm. Whatever else you think of that film, and while I agree from a mythological standpoint its very existence was in extremely poor taste, the talent, the production value, the mark of the craft was there. None of this was, however, capitalized upon to create anything truly profound. Jupiter Ascending’s unfortunate drawbacks are of a similar form.

I’d like to state emphatically however, I’m not trying to punish the film nor act as its apologist. Reckon I always end up saying this, but I am really just some dude. Sure, I read a lot of books and stuff, but that doesn’t appoint me some grand authority on the subject of fiction. These thoughts I try to convey in my write-ups are meant merely as opinions, framed in the form of investigating the quality of a film or game or whatever. To that end, I’m compelled to side with most folks in that, whatever else its got going for it, there’s some major deficiency holding back Jupiter Ascending from rising to a higher form of entertainment. So if the production values are high, where’s the casus belli all the angry critics are seeing here?

To puzzle that out, we ought first to determine by what criterion a truly good story is shaped. In that regard it’s likely the wisest to begin by reckoning what sort of story we’re dealing with here. Most people are wont to jump straight to the whole Hero’s Journey every dickhead YouTube reviewer read about in some sparknotes book while using the shitter at Barnes & Noble. But Joseph Campbell’s mimetic architecture isn’t the only sort of story that exists, not even in science fiction. Consider, for instance, anything written by H.P. Lovecraft, Darren Aronofsky’s The Fountain, Kubrick and Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey, Jonathan Glazer’s Under The Skin, Philip K. Dick’s various works, Andrei Tarkovsky’s Stalker, Stanisław Lem’s Solaris, Alex Garland’s Ex Machina, or Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar. These stories, while very sci-fi in their scope and measure, are far more introspective, and very contemplative when contrasted against fiction of the more traditional heroic adventure genre. Hell, even Paul Verhoeven’s Starship Troopers while appearing a mindless war movie on its surface is fundamentally a cautionary allegory. While conquering adversity is certainly a theme of its own within each of these stories, the breadth of that adversity’s effect on the narrative varies wildly, as well as the nature of adversity each character must face. Other heavier components, like displacement, post-humanism, philosophical allegory, are also usually present in such stories.

All of this likely seems a bit excessive to point out, but I promise it’ll get relevant later. But, uh… yeh. The next time some liberal arts asshat tries to tell you there’s only one real way a story can go, you can be safely justified in telling them to get bent. I mean read, yeh, tell them to read more shit, and watch more movies. That’d probably be more productive. But also tell them to get bent, the fuckers.

There can also, however, be stories that blend styles. The 2004 rebrand of Battlestar Galactica incorporates several philosophical elements, self-reflective, and meditative thematic ideas into its narrative of what would otherwise be a fairly standard science fiction conflict in outer space. The Wachowskis’ own The Matrix is a perfect example of a classic hero’s journey which also incorporates introspective themes into its lore, plot, and mythology, wherein the internal conflict of the protagonist is just as important as whatever external adversity he is meant to overcome. Where Battlestar Galactica 2004 uses its thematic material to craft a sci-fi adventure story, The Matrix uses a sci-fi adventure story to explore its thematic material. Seen in that light, I think the Wachowskis wanted Jupiter Ascending to have similar weight to its narrative, but they ended up recycling a sort of “human harvest” idea already seen in The Matrix (and arguably done in a more engaging way).

Jupiter Jones herself is a catalyst for an inter-familial conflict within a wealthy interstellar hierarchy. Though alien races do exist, the most dangerous aliens happen to be humans themselves, extraterrestrial humans of course. In Jupiter’s universe, it turns out that the wealthy and powerful have the ability to live forever (an idea also explored in the Neftlix adaptation Altered Carbon), but only by seeding countless worlds with humans, then harvesting these humans like crops and breaking these millions of people down into a sort of primordial youth serum by which the lives of the affluent may be extended.

Advanced genetics in Jupiter’s universe are the highest form of technology, and it is stated in all the cosmos the most sought-after resource is time. This is the reason these advanced humans out among the stars are able to splice human and animal genes, essentially creating entirely new races, and the reason why Jupiter herself is seen as a reincarnation of a woman who once owned countless stars and planets. Genes, to the wealthy and powerful, have a near spiritual significance. Jupiter is referred to as a Recurrence, a person who is long dead but whose gene-print inconceivably reappears in someone who is born centuries or even millennia later. This is seen as a near miracle, and thus is recognized by interstellar law as a legitimate reincarnation, giving this new person the same rights and privileges, and inheriting all the property previously held by the deceased person whose gene print they share.

And that’s where the conflict comes up. Jupiter is sought out by three siblings of the Abrasax family, one of the most elite and powerful families in the universe, of which she is the reincarnation of their mother and thus entitled to re-inherit all of their resources and capital which they currently control. The kids are Kalique (Tuppence Middleton), the well-to-do, but compassionate one, Titus (Douglas Booth), the more two-faced of the three who acts innocent but is clever as a viper, and Balem (Eddie Redmayne), the stereotypical villain of the piece who seems to have nervous ticks and an inability to raise his voice above a certain octave except in times of extreme stress. Of course, since Jupiter’s now meant to control everything they currently own, none of the three Abrasax kids can be fully trusted. Jupiter doesn’t have to face these three one-percenters alone however. She is accompanied by Caine Wise (Channing Tatum) an ex-soldier and wolf-splice, known as a Lycantant, who is hired by Titus to safely retrieve Jupiter from Earth before his siblings can get to her. Caine’s former commanding officer, a bee-splice known as Stinger (Sean Bean) also appears from time to time, as well as officers of the Aegis, an interstellar law enforcement agency.

If you are having a hard time following the characters here, it’s probably because there just isn’t much to any of the characters other than what I’ve already written about them. And therein lies the primary flaw with this film. The characters aren’t interesting, and the greater tragedy is that the characters are written to be uninteresting. Where a ton of care and attention went into crafting the look, feel and depth of the wider universe acting as the story’s setting, the characters within this story are criminally underwritten.

Earlier, I went to great lengths to illustrate the wealth of variety throughout genres of science fiction, just how many different types of stories we might get within this narrative framework. The purpose of explaining all of that to such a degree was meant to show you that not everything has to follow the same narrative flow. Sometimes stories can be more abstract, less character driven, less action heavy. In that regard, a story exemplar like Blade Runner doesn’t really need to have strongly written characters because the interpersonal aspects of its journey are less important than its atmospheric setting and stylistic momentum. The gravitas comes from a different place than in stories which are more character driven.

However, if a story does want to give us something more conventional, then it’s extremely important that the characters are strongly defined, well established and, even if not likable, at the very least interesting. Though a bit out of this wheelhouse, Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is notorious for featuring a dramatis personae of terribly vain, horrible sociopaths, but many of these characters are still written in a way that makes them interesting. Jupiter Ascending fashions itself as an epic space opera, a stylized adventure journey which goes from scrubbing toilets in Irving Park to rocketing through a wider spectacular galaxy. Within that story structure, the characters need to be given their proper attention, especially the protagonist. Only, this is not the case with this movie. In fact in Jupiter Ascending, the characters almost appear as afterthoughts, which is most unfortunate.

Despite being the protagonist’s love interest, Caine seems to have been given the most depth, as a literal lone-wolf personality, an orphan of a sort, a former soldier disgraced for an act of savagery, who longs to regain his military status as a Skyjacker, and was sprung from a prison called Deadland to rescue Jupiter from the clutches of filthy rich egomaniacs, a class of people he seems to utterly despise. Yet even Caine’s various portions of characterization are never fully explored, and he mostly serves as a vehicle to come dashing in and pluck Jupiter out of trouble over and over again. Secondary characters, other than Stinger (more on him later), are hardly there other than to function as a taxi service or exposition dump where appropriate, which is a shame since some of them have a great look but nothing else going on in the writing department to make them memorable. The Abrasax siblings are basically three different flavors of the same smug Soylent privilege, though Kalique seems to exist only to explain things for the benefit of the audience, and Balem seems to be accidentally memorable thanks to Eddie Redmayne’s unusual performance. Titus has some cool psychotic vibes with his underhanded motivations, slippery silver tongued bastard that he is, but even his role as the trickster doesn’t get its due in the end.

Stinger, Caine’s former commanding officer who is now an Aegis Marshal, is also written slightly deeper than even the Abrasax siblings. He took the fall for Caine’s misstep in the military, so he also lost his wings and was disgraced for it. Despite this, he is willing to help Caine and Jupiter throughout the story, and though begrudged he seems genuinely good at heart. Stinger’s point of interest however comes from his traits as a Splice between human and bee DNA. Yes, this leads to a funny line of dialogue, but there are some great examples of show-don’t-tell with Stinger, in that having bee instincts he seems superhumanly able to anticipate motion and react to it ridiculously quickly compared to most people. This ability gives him an edge in everything from fistfights to navigating massive fields of hunter-killer mines. This is hardly important to the plot, but I thought it was cool since it’s never stated outright, just displayed through his actions. Another example of a great idea that’s mostly left adrift.

Jupiter herself starts out as a typical protagonist for a Hero’s Journey. She’s a Jewish Russian immigrant who leads an unglamorous life cleaning bathrooms and tidying fancy homes for her family’s housekeeping service, apparently has bad luck with romance, and hardly ever has time to really do anything she enjoys. Typically, once these elements are presented, there will also be a revelation of something more intimate about the protagonist, her dreams and ambitions, something she longs to one day achieve, her hobbies or personality, perhaps a personal drawback or fear she wishes to overcome. But the most we get about Jupiter is that she wants to buy back a telescope which was once stolen from her astronomer father by the same thieves who murdered him (which we see early in the movie in an awkwardly directed scene). It’s not made clear if Jupiter herself has a genuine interest in astronomy, nor even what any of her interests happen to be.

This becomes a recurring problem throughout the film. Since no real internal conflict or personality of any kind is established for Jupiter, she isn’t led through any personal journey or self-exploration, nor anything which allows her to grow or evolve as the narrative opens up and accelerates. She’s basically just along for the ride, one of those wrong place wrong time sort of things. Her journey is entirely surface level, external forces dragging her around the stars without her having any real say in the matter nor agency of her own. She as very little idea of what she wants or who she is, from what we can tell, because we have no idea of those things either. Mila Kunis does a fine job with the material she’s given, but the material just isn’t much to run with, and if there is a drawback to her performance as an actress I promise in this case the fault is not with her.

The terrible lack of characterization hurts everything in the movie from its ethical conceits, plot momentum, all the way up to the romance subplot which only feels forced and lacking chemistry because the two leads aren’t properly written. They could have had chemistry, but its difficult for archetypes to interact without endowing them with personality. It’s a fundamental flaw from which all other flaws of the film stem because the personality, the character of the protagonist in this type of story is a fundamental element from which many other elements of the story stem.

Even towards the end, when Jupiter is forced into dangerous heroics and aggressive bravery it doesn’t feel like much of anything because for all we know she was brave all along, or maybe she wasn’t. We’re never given the chance to find out. Her larger moment of heroism comes not in a violent action of conquering the badguy (though she does beat him with a pipe later... in self-defense of course), but in refusing to compromise to Balem’s ultimatum, either resign her ownership of Earth or allow Balem to murder her family. It’s interesting to note that instead of rocking up and blowing his head off with a blaster, she just tells him to get fucked, which is a cool idea, non-violent protagonists are few and far between. Though the climax would have been far more satisfying had we gotten to know Jupiter much better before she gets to this point. Ultimately, the lack of strong characters make the progression of the movie feel awkward, and the denouement seems to come out of nowhere. It’s really too bad, since many facets of this film’s setup seemed to bear promise, and it’s more tragic than infuriating, leaving an audience with a countenance more in sorrow than in anger.

Like Jupiter herself, thematic elements are also only half-explored. The idea that genetics have advanced to such a point that life-regeneration has become a reality within this star-spanning civilization (albeit a reality exclusively available to the filthy, insanely wealthy) is an interesting idea, and there’s a lot of potential for the ethical quandaries related to that sort of technology, and what makes it possible. Yet little of this is given attention beyond the horror of Jupiter discovering the Abrasax family regularly kills billions of people for longevity and profit. Is their life-extending operation the only one out there? Or is it an industry? Are there black market dealers who develop and trade their own youth serum off the books? It’s all kind of muddy and little of it is given any explanation or nuance.

As we’ve established, Campbell’s hero’s journey isn’t the only way to go about a sci-fi story, but in Jupiter Ascending it’s like half-started without any of the follow-through, and the characters which should be the heart of the story are greatly lacking any depth. The film’s been compared to a Disney-style princess story, and even references Cinderella at one point, though it does seem to be aiming higher than this. Yet, the lackluster character writing and flat dialogue all make the story somewhat impotent, whatever its aim, leaving the movie looking like a majestically beautiful gild-feathered eagle, which just happens to be blind. Fun to look at, but has absolutely no idea where it’s going. I can’t articulate enough what a shame this all is, since there really are some cool ideas and sci-fi content here. I truly wish, as a sci-fi enthusiast, that Jupiter was truly able to ascend.

I’d recommend it as a fun romp through an intriguing galaxy, but it’s more useful as an example of how to get everything right with a movie, everything other than the thing that really holds it all together: a well-written protagonist. Still, I’m no intersectionalist, but it’s nice to see the girl get the guy at the end of the story, the way guy protagonists get to get the girl at the end of all their stories. That was a pleasant feeling, even if it wasn’t quite earned with everything come before it. Plus, you know; lizardmen, and jet-bikes. The Wachowskis are generally great at what they do though, just maybe have a tough time channeling it. Here’s hoping they can get back to us with something truly badass in future because the level of commitment to the craft seen in this movie is extraordinary, even if the reach exceeds the grasp in this particular case. 

                     侍    headless                                     

[rosinapowrie-blog]

The Teacher Dichotomy: the problem with hero teachers.

“The only thing I know for sure is that I know nothing at all, for sure” – Socrates

Learning isn't just about passing exams.  Since starting a career in teaching four years ago, I have struggled to remember this myself, let alone show pupils what they could be missing out on.  In response, I set up a school society mimicking TEDx Talks, giving kids the chance to listen to in interesting lecture at lunchtime with no hidden agenda: simply to try to show them that academia goes beyond mark schemes and box ticks.  This was my opening address entitled 'The Teacher Dichotomy: the problem with hero teachers.'

_______________________________________________________________________In my first fortnight of teaching at a prestigious new school, once we got over that slightly awkward unsure phase of ‘nu teacher who dis,’ a student asked me where I’d been to university and what I’d studied...

‘St Andrews, in Scotland... where Prince William went’ (I added after only a minuscule pause which I have become accustomed to when speaking of the tiny town on the East Fife coast). ‘I read English Literature, but did loads of modules in Philosophy, Classics, Art History... it was good.’ ‘Wow’ the student replied, ‘that’s like really good isn’t it? You must be... like... really clever..!’ And then the student said the 10 words that have shocked me the most in my haggering career as an educator... ‘So why did you end up as a teacher then?’ Now I am not so naive as to think that this is simply one view held by one teenager in that particular moment... What this delightful girl had uttered was probably the ultimate Freudian slip of today’s youth... you lot just don’t see the value in education for its own sake... you think that school is just something you have to get through, preferably do well at, then you can start living your best life. But this must be challenged: if we know and accept that gaining knowledge is a vital crevasse to conquer whilst mountaineering the Range of Success, why do we see it merely as a means to an end? Why can we not enjoy the ride, live in the moment, and value our opportunity to learn new stuff? Why is it that, still in 2018, when teaching is known to be one of the most draining and stringently trained professions, requiring the skill and discipline of an artist, athlete and jail warden simultaneously all before 9am 5 days a week, do our very target audience view our profession as a sort of embarrassing accident that losers happen to fall into? Perhaps you are already outraged by my cynicism. I am aware I am currently preaching to the converted - you guys have chosen to spend your lunch time in this room pursuing knowledge and discussion. But I vehemently believe that this modern apathy to education is due largely to the portrayal of teachers in the media and popular culture. I don’t solely mean the ludicrous click bait that floods your newsfeeds every day (I’m thinking headlines such as ‘boy of 1 wins Nobel peace prize for finding cure to cancer despite failing all GCSEs - who needs em anyway’ or even just the multitude of distracting cat videos you’d much rather be watching), I mean those subliminal messages in books, TV and film that have been drip fed to my generation and yours in our formative years. I’m talking about The Teacher Dichotomy: heroes vs villains. By this, I mean that teachers are firmly type cast into two roles: the sickening sycophant who inspires their flock with their unconventional quirks and flagrant disregard for any sort of teaching standard... that one who really gets down to da youf’s level. Or, worse, the maniacal villain who struts around with a cape and cane doling out detentions and appearing entirely inhumane. The inability to portray teachers as warm blooded mammals with the same instincts, desires and fears as the rest of the world has not only devalued the joy of education, it actually undermines the incredible passion and hard work that goes into just the average, unmemorable bog standard Mr or Mrs Bloggs’ daily job as a teacher. On demand, could anyone name an example of just a regular teacher that a) exists in a book/film etc and b) fulfils meaningful purpose in the plot purely in his or her role as educator and not for any other reason? Three examples analysed... Firstly, our heroes: I’ll start with that that ever hilarious, ever chaotic excuse for a school teacher portrayed by loveable comedian Jack Whitehall in popular BBC3 series ‘Bad Education.’ Alfie Wickers, the History NQT at Abbey Grove School, prefers to befriend students rather than enable them responsibly to achieve their potential. His typical pedagogy includes such escapades as practical re-enactments of battles, or ‘Class Wars’, where any Ofsted inspector would literally have a fit at the flagrant violation for safeguarding an 'ealf and safety. Yet Mr Wickers is respected by Form K – they even like him and learn from him – but do we see any assessment, formative or summative? Do we see him planning or marking? Do we see him tracking progress and planning interventions? While it may be a TV show, and art does not need to imitate life, the point is that Mr Wickers is seen as a fun, likeable teacher.  If he did anything that he was actually supposed to, he would be seen as boring.  And what sort of message is that sending a young audience – that the people who dedicate their lives to ensuring their progress in a conventional way are not heroes.  Only those who offer them fun and entertainment, and no actual learning, are.

At the other end of the positive spectrum, there are those sorts of hero teachers who move students emotionally, yet still wouldn’t actually pass an observation. The epitome is John Keating – the maverick English master portrayed by Robin Williams in the classic ‘80s film, ‘Dead Poets Society.’  Keating encourages his vulnerable student, Anderson, to come out of his shell by joining the eponymous banned extracurricular club.  Here, he forges friendships with unlikely characters and experiences true life and love by looking at poetry differently and forgetting the pressures and requirements of school.  Professor Keating is eventually called out for his disregard for school standards and duly sacked, leaving the boys chanting a heart-wrenching chorus of Whitman’s ‘O Captain, my Captain’ whilst standing on desks.  It’s the ultimate bildungsroman: the boys have come of age, and Keating helped them get there.  Yet again, his inspiring nature is not at all borne of his skill in traditional education methods, but rather the fact that he ignores them completely.  Yet another example of the hero teacher, shaming regular teachers into the background of mediocrity.

And now the other end of the spectrum – the villains.  Who better to analyse than Rowling’s malevolent Professor Umbridge, who swans into Hogwarts in The Order of the Phoenix with the sole aim of making monumental, ‘Ministry approved’ changes to the school curriculum and generally shaking the status quo.  Fans of the series, let’s forget the reasons behind our negative view of Umbridge’s changes for now (the government’s refusal to believe that Voldemort has returned, etc) and read this simply as a teacher trying to raise standards by reviewing current practice and attempting to embed systemic change.  We see this when she addresses the school for the first time: ‘some old habits will be retained, and rightly so, whereas others, outmoded and outworn, must be abandoned. Let us move forward, then, into a new era of openness, effectiveness and accountability, intent on preserving what ought to be preserved, perfecting what needs to be perfected, and pruning wherever we find practices that ought to be prohibited." This sounds rather like a forward-thinking teacher, school leader or governor wanting to make improvements, yet she is completely slated and seen as evil.  For example, what are her actual crimes: conducting lesson observations of fellow staff?  Holding staff accountable for their performance and the progress of pupils, and removing them from post if they are not up to scratch? Ensuring that the curriculum is standardized? Essentially, all things that normal teachers do in normal schools to meet the teachers’ standards and provide robust education systems.  However, she is utterly vilified for doing so: so much so that Rowling chooses to portray her as committing the ultimate teacher-sin – failing to safeguard students and actually physically assaulting them in her detentions.  This is a choice the author has made: to show traditional schooling and education standards as petty compared to the great, heroic things that the rest of the Hogwarts teachers inspire the heard with.  The irony is that Umbridge is certainly the only member of staff who would even pass a PGCE, let alone be promoted to senior leadership, in real life.  Yet again, we see the dichotomy in action, reinforcing that subliminal message that traditional education is nasty, negative and pointless.

The glass ceiling must be broken and education needs to be esteemed once more.  The conditioning we’ve been subjected to through popular culture has not helped, but now we have been enlightened to our ignorance. The great irony is that if we enjoy the ride, stop seeing education as a means to end, but rather an end in itself, then you will get further in life if you have become a fully rounded person with a broad cultural capital.  Take umbrage with Umbridge: value your current opportunities and enjoy learning your subjects even if you never need to use that information again.

[ho-ods-blog]

MEANINGLESS DISORDER IS TO BE CHALLENGED NOT FEARED. WE CAN BE OVERWHELMED OR WE CAN BE EMBOLDENED.

If we reduce everything to information do we lose the aesthetics, empathy and much more in life? What do you think?

To understand my current perspective and create the desire within you to pursue your personalized & positively balanced, productive quest for understending is to imagine what what isn’t possible by being easily done yet not in fact impossible - the sentence explaining all conspiracies as well as  what I’ll be explaining through the example of a chip - which isn’t one of the conspiracies at all.

Imagine if we all got chipped, for the sake of mutual understanding imagine it like a tiny memory card inserted, let’s say behind your ear which works because it connects, duplicates then mimmics each neuron and then replaces it by removing the original   with the technological components also within it.

Imagine that the heart keeps our body and mind alive and the chip our brain.

Now imagine that chip contains the whole of information from the main central computer which had collected all of searches and statistics along with the feedback itself in a matter of seconds upon laying your eyes on the person, home etc as well is still providing the same procedures and updating everyone each decided period of time.

Would you want to live in a world which now defines you insane/and/or questionable because you googled dick cheese around your friends for a joke and tried to understand sexual preferences as a kid? Nobody would. But that would be inside the mind of the person who would lay their eyes upon you a.k.a. it would get the information from the chip on another and that person would get your information just the same.

Do we then lose the aesthetics, empathy and much more in life? 

Okay, I am definitely writing this particular chunk of sentences to also signify I no longer give a shit about privacy because the groups of supertechs could come at me at any given moment, disrupt my algorithms to make my content visible to less users and there really isn’t much I can do as an average citizen with some interesting hobbies so therefore a couple of people from my hometown judging me for actively pursuing my interests in a way I choose really doesn’t even come to me as a negative thing anymore because there’s far more going on which I want to focus on and direct my maximum positive potential and impact on.

Now that that is out of the way,

That transhumanistic viewpoint(the chip example) is what I chose because I’ve read too much about it, seen too many films which lead to more research and read too many insights but today that example of the chip is just a prolonged and complicated version where the chip is the computer, the phone, the laptop and the human can find out information just not fast and easily or without extensive technical literacy and trial and error.

That is why this cybernetic connection was implemented with the assistance and constructive creativity of the groups of supertechs for the agendas long as the existance itself. I can write about this in another post extensively.

What matters to me more than my own privacy and social justice within my own experience is a positive change I can contribute by sharing not the information I am learning but the way I work my mind and actions around it because throughout the past year I have come to terms with the exceptional components I was once scared to share.

Today, I am conscious of my voice and more so confident in it’s validity because I see no negatively directed energy consciously or unconsciously motioned my way as anything which could ever be stronger than God, no weapons forged against me prosperous and no truth which I speak less legitimate than somebody’s illusion of theirs despite them percieving it as truth.

I now resonate with the ideals which bring in no obligations for accusations to prove what is already truth as well as no pointed fingers but rather everyday courses of action from healed individuals of own controlled mindsets because keeping a positive vibration is in fact what should matter right when you wake up, while you are brushing your teeth, making lunch, going to school, work etc. what matters is to use the internet, web and social media consciously as well as choosing what you want to think about and what gets to hurt you and keep you stagnant.

This simple piece of text is made with the intent to serve it’s purpose on it’s own.

It isn’t done so that at a certain point in the future when there’s plenty of them as well as other endeavors it’s author gets money, status, recognition, fame, etc, nor is it the goal of any of my visionary creative endeavors.

I had made enough of regretful decisions in my life to innerstand, understand and overstand as well as define the emotion of it without words necessarily that I must use the remaining time of mine on Earth for the greater good.

It is fortunate for us to be alive at a time where doing something as simple as writing a micro-blog post can offer some people a chance to start controlling their thoughts in hopes of maintaining a safe space.

What I had gathered from merely a couple of videos on youtube in which Jaron Lanier ( computer philosophy writer, considered the funding father of virtual reality, visual artist, was in the first company which sold VR goggles, was in Atari, worked on apps for internet 2, visiting scholar at Silicon graphics, works at Microsoft research since 2009 as thhe interdisciplinary scientist etc) is speaking about the contents of his book “you are not a gadget” as well as information since the digital age took place was more than enough for me to try and find the appropriate place to channel it constructively.

I decided to use the notes I make along the way as I watch the videos and read the material as a tool I can shape into something for those who aren’t necessarily willing to sit and watch youtube videos all day long, clean their house and listen to them, drive and audio it or perhaps even read the books ( which I want to highlight still ARE much-MUCH greater sources for everything I will ever be speaking on because through the information I share I am still secluding a paragraph to explain how I choose to deal with the information instead of turning it as a weapon for my own stagnancy and misguided lack of faith.)

It is still the biggest tragedy to me to see this cybernetic connection we share done in the utmost negative way and the knowing it hadn’t even started to take place at it’s maximum potential is truly what could be terrifying to a point of episodic daily nausea if only us and in this case myself were to base our mental states upon people and actions which are outside of our control.

The computer can send information to another bundle of information in a set of bits and it is analyzing them mathematically and, yes - it does not matter to a computer what the information says.

”Meaningless disorder is to be challenged and not fear because we can choose to be overwhelmed or emboldened.”

The strength from within is omnipresent and the fear of failure, lack of constructive impact or whatever the individual might use to shape their own low vibrational perspective for not making an active shift in their own life -are all illusions because the purpose of the negativity is to achieve sustainability of itself as it is. That is why it is important to understand you either sink towards the end of your life or swim towards it because as you can see the finish line is the same yet the pathaways different.

It may be easier to keep the sinking mindset yet it isn’t even remotely as joyful, courageous, rewarding, fruitful, positive, needed and surprisingly positively influential to those around you (as well as much, more I can write about) than the swimming.

In this life you can choose to think finishing highschool and  pursuing a degree, finding and maintaining a job with or without a carreer, finding, accepting, returning as well as nurturing and maintaining love, travelling and friendships are the peak you need and want yet the sinking mindset still bears the low vibrational tendency to show up uninvited and subtle as it hides within outcomes you learned how to disregard positively and label it swimming.

Whatever you choose, the information presented remains existant and true.

Anytime two people connect to the internet is universally financed by a third party who believes they can use behavioralist techniques to manipulate the first two people without them undestanding whats up.

In regards to the talks by Jaron Lanier -

the WE is the global cyber net in which those who built it, are making the most money off it as well as keeping it existant are somehow above the circumstances and the average citizen are still modern day workers to keep it going and developing into whatever the purpose of the behavioralist techniques really is while it is disquised as solely statistics to better consumerism and the user experience.

“We’ve created a society based on universal trickery and deception and therefore developed an already flawed society into a universal community of individuals who do not believe election votes, routinely expect to be bullied one way or another and made to feel terrible. That is the society which does not believe in truth anymore.” we're all connected, from seemingly all perspectives.

A manmade connection would be computers which had done another interconnection and way back in 1938, a man by the name of Burrhus Frederic Skinner decided to present an idea of treating computers as a tool to remove individuality and by experiments alter the human nature by getting them to change by the reward/punishment stimuli a.k.a. positive/negative feedback loop(social experience) and the negative ones are more common actually because of that feedback loop between the dopamine hits. The person contributes their motion, eye movements and facial expressions to the statistics.

The experiment is a human version of keeping a rat in a box and providing it some food when it pulls down the tiny lever inside that box .

The cybernetics are naturally a negativity machine. The likes, comments, the interaction people get on social media is what provides them the small dopamine hits which keep them using it in the ways which highlight education last.

Skinner was about using digital networks to transcent idiosincracy(a mode of behaviour or way of thought peculiar to an individual!) He was the first there to have something to say about peoples “weird and felatious ideas about freedom) the first time it crossed paths with computing was through Norbert Weiner who was the first generation contribute when the ideas for altering started.

He was the first who started changing others’ perceptions on how the computers are being percieved. The idea is to use a computer to make it into much more than it is,as well asmuch more complicate and Weiner coined the term for it from the Greeks which is the now famous “cybernetics”)

(BOOK RECOMMENDATION: WEINER : NETWORKING COMPS)

DEFINITION OF CYBERNETICS BY CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY:

the scientific study of how information is communicated in machines and electronic devices, comparing this with how information is communicated in the brain and nervous system / Too often a simplistic cybernetic control model underpins performance measurement systems. -cybernetics was trumpeted as a universal science of government that would help to guide the social organization necessary for modernization.

DEFINITION OF CYBERNETICS BY DICTIONARY.COM: the study of human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to communication engineering.

What if you have a computer watching a human being, his moves, looks etc and then what if that computer provided stimulus. Couldn’t this computer gradually become an automated behavioralist who controls the person?

This is a human use of human being and if everybody has these computers with themselves always then these little computers can measure everything about those people, who they talk to, what they search, their locations, and in return give them some sort of reward/feedback - texts, sounds, art etc.  but what we neglected is the radios connecting all of those small computers to a big computer which is modifying a computer like a behavioralist who could pull statistics and change society without you knowing it is happening to you, too.  

This all goes into depth just like anything and the particular planted seed had developed itself stranded into one probability for salvation in a clusterfuck of mass destruction of probabilities because despite the good and the bad within for example Artificial Intelligence, those of us who consider it’s positive aspects are on the same page as we speak of it the like we speak of  humans who, naturally, aren’t all good with good intentions and the technological advancements are not yet well balanced with anything else in our world which is behind it.

Instead of rescuing people, natural resources, animals, finances, jobs, security etc. we had massively shifted to a world of subtle, reliable shades of different types of horror in which ignorance serves as a peace of mind, heard, body and soul which still is mostly low vibrational and contributing to the madness in any way the technology pleases.

The culture of digital technology and it’s strong movements back in the 80′s and 90′s served to commerce the idea of making everything free and open. The culture, the software, the music, the encyclopedia, the anything.

The idea was to use a certain special group of people considered the supertechs to change the coutse of history with the advertising model as the meeting point.

The surface experience for people is about business of advertisements where the biggest are the wealthiest and at this point Mr.Lanier had already confirmed that he is actively supporting Google and had sold his company once to them.

What interests me about Mr.Lanier is why he thinks that nobody truly hears what he is saying because most people do and the only reason nobody is doing anything to actively pursue the most productive courses of action towards the biggest change is the fact we think we will be met with death or disappointment because one broken down middle class individual is nothing to a group of elite supertech at the Silicon valley type of hubs around the globe.

Mr. Lanier says the right way to proceed is to change yet he bears such friction when he is saying that what we would be doing is unimaginable yet achievable if the act of trying actually takes place. So, is he saying that the dominant power considers the change unimaginable because they had created this agenda which does not deem it fitting but speaks on what could be done if we were to actually do something which nobody within that elite community actually wants if the advertisement model is still not in their infrastructural ownership?

The experience of our lives is much more deep and valuable than certain wordings deem it out to be.

“Social experience” sounds like two words you read and go on yet what we rarely consider is what it all means.

It is your entire living experience and it matters because we’ve created such an easy way to unconsciously shift our energy to motion due to feelings and where we direct it and using words as energy signatures which help and to further explain just understand that we even think with words and the manifestation is a path of directed energy. (Emotion, E=energy, energy in motion)

The bizarre solutions of the supertechs as I had already stated were to make everything open and sharable without much knowledge of behind the scenes.

The differences between advertising , adjusting and finetuning(a.k.a manipulation a.k.a behavior modification without the consumers knoweledge) because:

advertisers=manipulators,

companies=behavior manipulation modifiers,

engagement =addiction

The changes this creates are small, broad and statistical which is how you achieve a goal without mass disturbances.

The companies sales pitch example is: We’re targeting this group of two million consumers. We can get 3% of this part of our consumer whole to change by 5%.”

You could say: Who cares? We get free shit for these tiny shades of difference.” but what I must state once more is the importance of what Jaron is saying is that the reliable shades of difference carefully applied consistantly have a compounding effect/like compound interest over time and the results are a significant change which CAN make shit really ugly like overturn elections, disrupt the society.

One important thing to mention is that Mr. Lanier defines the process of placing the whole world through a central computer would be mass insanity yet he states that it is not feasible which he used to say it isn’t impossible yet not as easy.

All of those fast samplings capture what drives you fastest - the responses. The negativity which makes the most money is between the dopamine hits. These include startle responses, becoming scared, arising fast and decaying slowly.

BEHAVIORALISM BY WIKIPEDIA: Behaviouralism seeks to examine the behaviour, actions, and acts of individuals – rather than the characteristics of institutions such as legislatures, executives, and judiciaries – and groups in different social settings and explain this behavior as it relates to the political system. BEHAVIORALISM BY GOOGLE: the methods and principles of the scientific study of animal (and human) behaviour.

BEHAVIORISM BY GOOGLE: the theory that human and animal behaviour can be explained in terms of conditioning, without appeal to thoughts or feelings, and that psychological disorders are best treated by altering behaviour patterns.

DEFINITION OF CYBERNETICS BY CAMBRIDGE DICTIONARY: the scientific study of how information is communicated in machines and electronic devices, comparing this with how information is communicated in the brain and nervous system / Too often a simplistic cybernetic control model underpins performance measurement systems. -cybernetics was trumpeted as a universal science of government that would help to guide the social organization necessary for modernization. DEFINITION OF CYBERNETICS BY DICTIONARY.COM: the study of human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to communication engineering.

So we have to find a way to be sane throughout the paranoia one could encounter. To be optimistic despite the realism pushing itself with logic by default.

We have to face up to climate change.

We have to define our fear of A.I and transhumanism,

We have to stop genetically modifying food and people,

We have to start filtering our tap water,

We have to stop painting another false image over mass murders, dissapearences and the already painted picture of peace,

We have to find a way to stop deforestation, habitat loss, poaching,

We have to implement a steady course of action to limit the amount of technical illiteracy,

We have to find a way to create money which isn’t from trees, fix minimal pay where it exists only on paper, remove the governments maximum involvement and keep it a normal percentage,

We have to be aware of the extinction of animals which are actively happening each year,

We have to find a way of dealing with trash outside of the ocean because it is killing the beings meant to live in it not be murdered in it,

We have to find a way to deal with our natural resources again which are sunlight, atmosphere, water, land along with vegetation, animal life that naturally subsits upon or within the identified substances, coal, oil, natural gas, phosphorous, other minerals, iron, soil, timber which are all exposed to destruction.

We have to start purging out egotistical issues from our hearts and choose education and a multiversal mindset through local actions and sharing this post would actually be a gigantic first step.

We have to find a way to remain sane despite the world.

Never stop believing in our own purpose because of low vibrational people who mask out the words of yours in a humoristic set back which always work around the same groups of people who value popularity amongst their friends and social media than actually working on becoming a better person with an active role in shifting the world as a small, reliable shade of difference simply because they found a way of pushing out their own content without making a fuss about their own awareness.

What is the measure to which we measure empathy these days, asked the deceased Alan Turing, who will be the next topic on ho-ods.

Would we be in a position to proclaim equal rights to a machine if the machine could pretend to be a person undistinguishable from me and you.Do you agree with what the C.E.O of Google is actively sharing when you realize that it comes about the internet coming alive as a big living thing in which we are neurons/thoughts and the personalizations we make don’t allow personell forgetting.

Ask yourself why shouldn’t you trust the promise of artificial intelligence?

Who is the civilization for?

How to be a humanist and pro technology at the same time?

What is a person in todays age?

Are we really cyber liberaterians because we haven’t gotten passed anything new due to the fact we have chosen to give everything of ours for free as we are portrayed as liberaterians?

Who owns the future?

What about misdirect angry people who grew up in a less functional world than it ought to be given due to our technological capabilities?

The next essay will be posted sometime on march 16th. Be sure to check out You Are Not a Gadget by Jaron Lanier either on youtube or pdf.

[shelleyseale]

12 Days of Giving: The Gift of Passion

This is the seventh in our special “12 Days of Giving” series running for the holiday season. It’s a little different from what you might think of as traditional presents or giving. We aren’t really talking about stuff you buy or a gift list. Rather, on these 12 days, we will be talking about different gifts that you can give to yourself, or others — those that have a deeper meaning, that can help you live with intention, be happier, be healthier. Soul gifts, you might even call them. Join us on the journey. Passion is what drives us as human beings, what makes things desirable and worthwhile. It's why we fall in love, why we pursue a certain profession or talent, why we take up causes, why we explore the world. The dictionary defines passion as a "strong and barely controllable emotion." So how do you find your passion? How do you develop it, and gift it to yourself or others? While that can be a tricky and complex question, there are a few different schools of thought about passion. First of all, there are certain things in life that you just know you're passionate about, that you probably always have been for about as long as you can remember. Things that you can't imagine not doing or not having in your life. For example, for me some of those things are: reading, writing, animals and travel. They've always been a part of me, and I wouldn't really be me without them. "Nothing great in the world has ever been accomplished without passion." ~Georg Hegel

Image by Freepik So part of giving yourself the gift of passion, is giving yourself the room in your life for those things you are passionate about. Making sure they are a part of your life in some capacity. When it comes to animals, I've almost always had pets (and have a dog right now, Selma). But I also volunteer and foster quite a bit for several animal rescue organizations (I have a foster dog right now), I dog-sit regularly for other people, and I often incorporate animal/wildlife activities in my travel. Bingo! Hitting two passions with one stone! I make travel a priority — I forego a lot of other things that people spend money on like new car payments, expensive haircuts, new furniture or extensive wardrobes in order to put money back to fund my travel. I read books like they're going out of style, and as far as writing — well, I built an entire career around it. Which brings me to one of the differing opinions about the idea of "following your passion" as your work livelihood.

Should you build a career around your passion?

Personally, I think there's no right or wrong answer to this question. Many people, myself included, do exactly that and because of it, lead incredibly happy and fulfilled lives. Not feeling like they are working at a job they don't really like, or merely tolerate, or even like but don't love. In short, a job. Instead, we feel like we aren't really "working" the way other people define it, so to speak, because we get to do what we love every day for our living. For people like us, we also generally can't imagine not doing our passion work, or doing anything else. This defines me as a writer; and I have many friends and acquaintances who fall into this category as musicians, people who founded nonprofits around a cause they are passionate about, people who started up entrepreneurial ventures, and many more.

Image by Rawpixel on Unsplash But this isn't always the best route or piece of advice for everyone. Take this article in The Atlantic, for instance. Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford University, thinks that advising people to follow their passion in work is steering people wrong. That it can lead them to think that if they don't experience an overwhelming sense of emotion about the work they're doing, or if you in fact do anything that feels like work, you are in the wrong career. Personally, I can say that these two beliefs are misguided, even if you are following your passion in your work. While overall my work is my passion and I wouldn't want to do anything else, it most certainly does feel like work many times; there are many days or projects where I just plain don't feel like doing it; and I often decidedly do not feel an overwhelming sense of emotion (at least, not positive emotion) about what I'm doing at that time. That's just life, in my opinion. Dweck and two other college professors conducted a study on this, and now argue that passions aren't found — they're developed. For example, you may not have ever known that you were passionate about a certain subject, until perhaps you attend a class or a lecture or have a conversation with someone who knows a lot about it, and find yourself thinking it is incredibly interesting and fascinating. To the extent that you delve into it and become passionate about it. I do think that this happens to us a lot throughout life; I've gotten much more passionate about cooking in the past decade or so (though I would never want to make that my career), and I didn't really develop a passion for travel until I was gifted a month-long European trip as a high school graduation presents (thanks Mom and Dad!) When it comes to making a passion your life's work, I think it depends on A) What kind of person you are; B) what the passion is; and C) what else you are good at or passionate about. Like I said, I'm very passionate about food and cooking, and it's something that I enjoy immensely. But I would never want to work in that field; I think it would quickly kill my love for it. Some passions are better off left as hobbies or side interests. To give you another example, my partner Keith loves scuba diving. He's been certified for a long time and he goes on dive trips frequently (he has one coming up in less than two weeks), or goes diving while he's on other travels. He even got me into diving to a certain extent; although it's not a passion for me like it is for him, I've done those "introductory" dive sessions in Nicaragua and in Australia and had a blast. At one point, Keith even considered becoming a dive instructor or leading people on dive trips. But the more he thought about it, the more he realized that to make an activity that he enjoyed so much into a job, he believed that he would lose the joy he got from it, just as a diver.

Cultivating your passion

In his book So Good They Can’t Ignore You, author Cal Newport writes, "There’s little evidence that most people have pre-existing passions waiting to be discovered, and believing that there’s a magical right job lurking out there can often lead to chronic unhappiness and confusion when the reality of the working world fails to match this dream." Newport's main point is that you don’t have to discover your dream job, you create your dream job. In this article on Medium, Rey HS shares some good advice from Newport and others about how to cultivate your passion into a dream job. Maria Forleo, that I follow and love to read, has another take on passion. Writing for Oprah Magazine, Forleo says that the problem with trying to find our passion is that we think about it and analyze it too much; in short, we're using our heads, when passion lies in our hearts. Here are a few other great articles and resources on cultivating your passion: Gretchen Rubin, one of my favorite inspiring people to follow and author of the fantastic book, The Happiness Project, wrote this article in Forbes. The website Positively Present also has a good story on the topic, that was part of the Random Acts of Kindness Kick Arse group. Take the Passion Profile Quiz at Clarity on Fire, a coaching and inspirational website. Eight ways to find the true passion in life that has eluded you is the topic of this story at The Telegraph.

Photo by Jenna Anderson on Unsplash

You don't have to be good at your passion — just do it!

I had to throw this in there because  I think it's important. Like I said at the beginning of this story, we all have passions, big and small. Some of them could possibly fuel our entire career, while others make up a piece of our life that makes it that much more enjoyable. That is cooking and caring for animals, for me; while my passion for writing is my life's work. But believe me, I'm no great chef. I'm a pretty good cook, so don't think I'm belittling myself. I would say I'm above average, even. But it would terrify me to compete on a cooking show, even one like Master Chef that is geared towards non-professional home cooks. And there's no way I am good enough to cook in any restaurant. Could I get that way if I cultivated and developed that passion because I really wanted to? Yes, probably. But I don't want to. I want to keep my cooking as an enjoyable hobby, and I don't have to be James Beard material to do that. Let's look at other potential passions someone might have: dancing, or athletics, or painting. You don't have to necessarily be great at any of these things to make sure they're incorporated into your life. If you are truly passionate about something, it must be a part of your life. There are plenty of places around that have dance classes, whether formal studios or even clubs and live music venues, like White Horse in my Austin neighborhood, that offer regular dance lessons (often times even for free). For someone who loves to dance, that could be a fantastically fun thing to incorporate into your life. Maria Forleo's article is an example of just how she approached this with dance. Or joining a local soccer, swim or volleyball team, if sports is your thing. Take an art class, or get together a group of like-minded friends who want to meet once a week or once a month at someone's house to paint, drink wine, and enjoy each other's company. Or just go buy your own art supplies and make a commitment to yourself, to give yourself the time each week to immerse yourself in that passion. Don't let fear of not being the best at something, hold you back from doing it.

Above all, make sure your passions are part of your life!

Read the full article

[politicsaccordingtohistory]

Well, I’m Surprised

It does happen, though I didn’t expect it from Tumblr of all places. So, hello @archaeologysucks, and let me first and foremost thank you for your time. As some of your commenters pointed out, you didn’t have to respond. Especially not as frequently and in such detail. It’s refreshing, honestly. I suppose I should have realized that this would actually be a conversation, instead of a one sided attempt with the other party lobbing accusations of ill will, after the second post you made. I am afraid that I only realized that you had, in a sense, offered an olive branch when you understood that I do not believe men and women should be treated differently based on their sex. I will try to keep as concise as possible, but I will readdress a couple points, I didn’t get to explain my position well with a character limit. So I spent the last few days considering this rather unique situation I found myself in and I have considered my words carefully, though I fear I will end up offending you anyway.

First and foremost, your comment about the woman who recounted a time where she... oh dear, I am going off the top of my head here... went on a dig with eleven other students, with only one other person being a woman? You never explained how that was unfair. What was the process by which students were selected to go to the site? Was it based on grades? Drawing names at random? Who could afford to pay a fee? A representative sample of men and women from the class? And beyond that, how many men and women were in the class in the first place? And what was the ratio of men to women who signed up for it, if that was even a possibility? People, no matter how awful they are, have a reason for doing the things they do. Those with bad reasons are the ones who we dismiss, so it would be important to know all the facts about this trip before making a judgement on why it turned out the way it did.

“It sounds like you really do believe that people end up where they do based on merit and natural predisposition. I’m sorry to be the one to tell you that the ideal world you are imagining does not exist yet.”

Well, of course not. I don’t actually believe that world exists yet. It might never exist. Because the real world isn’t perfect and there will always be assholes. Despite my best efforts, my weight has been a point of contention among many employers despite the fact my former employers had nothing but kind words and sometimes even praise in rare times for my work ethic and capabilities. Nothing short of a totalitarian dictatorship will change the fact that people judge, and sometimes on such surface characteristics.

“I can understand feeling terrified. I, too, once naively believed as you do that we, as a society, had moved beyond that kind of inequality. The Civil Rights Movement and Second Wave Feminism fixed all those social problems in the 60s and 70s, right? I grew up white and middle class in a mostly white, fairly liberal community, and thought my own experiences were typical, because they were all I knew. I remember how upsetting it was for me when I began to realize what an unfair and sometimes terrible place the world still is for many people.”

Well, yes and no. I did once believe that, as a society, we have passed some sort of threshold of equality. History is not some far away time, history is made every second of the day. Things don’t really change, merely our perception of them do. The truth of the matter is, people will always be people. Unfair things will happen because people are free. Moreover, laws are only good for two things- deterring someone from doing an action, and punishing them after having committed said action.

If you think that the world isn’t a terrible place for anyone, then you may want to look again. Any human can, at any time, be t-boned by a drunk driver, have a psychopath break into their home and kill them while they sleep, be afflicted by cancer, die in a work related accident, die from asphyxiation during a meal, drown, be attacked by a wild animal, be afflicted with a terminal disease. And that is not even getting into what any one human can do to their fellow person. I am aware that, on average, men are stronger than women physically, but weapons, intoxicants, and the sleep cycle exist. There are means that one can overpower someone even multiple times bigger than them. No one is immune to bad things happening.

“People frequently experience different challenges, treatment, and sometimes even violence, because of their gender, race, sexuality, ability, appearance, background, etc. It’s going to take a lot more work by folks like you and me before we achieve anything close to a level playing field.”

How do I explain this. What you are asking for is utopia. A goal we can work towards, yes, but nothing we will ever reach. Violence, especially, is something that will always happen. It is something that I had suffered for a multitude of reasons growing up by the hands of my peers. Beyond that, there are those that are broken. Specific mental illnesses that leave them unable to process certain things. I would love a world where no one fought, where there was no hurt or suffering, but short of stripping people of individual freedoms I don’t see how that is possible.

“I advise you to do some serious background reading on this subject, and think about what you can do to help create that better world you believe in. It’s never a bad thing to check in and take inventory of our own internalized biases. We all have them, and unless we acknowledge them and do the hard work of rooting them out, we can only be part of the problem. We can all grow in our humanity and awareness.

I encourage you to start with Wikipedia’s article on sexism in academia, which covers a lot of the basics, and then check out the “references” and “further reading” sections at the bottom to figure out where to go next. I would also recommend you read about blind auditions, and what they reveal about the often subconscious biases people still hold.”

I don’t think Wikipedia, despite its sources, is a good means by which to understand a subject. Even as a starting point. As for a better world, there’s not much I can do other than insist that we treat people as people. We treat the people that are our friends with love and those that are our enemies with politeness until such a time when that is no longer possible. No one sex, ethnic group, sexuality, or anything of the sort should be place in one of those categories full stop. All black people should not be one’s enemies, but they shouldn’t all be one’s friends either, for example. Instead, go on a case by case basis and decide for yourself who to associate with and who you would rather not. And if most people do that, that kind of thinking will be reflected in society as a whole. Be the change you want to see and all.

Also, be careful what you wish for, as a fair warning I might just want to leave you with this.

I thank you for the opportunity to at least air my grievances, I appreciated the dialogue.

[douchebagbrainwaves]

JUST AS HOUSES ALL OVER AMERICA ARE FULL OF CHAIRS THAT ARE, WITHOUT THE OWNERS EVEN KNOWING IT, NTH-DEGREE IMITATIONS OF THE ATTITUDES OF PEOPLE WHO'VE DONE GREAT THINGS

One of the most powerful of those was the existence of channels. Is there some test you can use is: always produce. If there's something people still won't do, it stops being a self-indulgent choice, like buying expensive office furniture.1 But I tried living in Florence when I was talking about how investors are reluctant to put money into startups in bad markets, even though that's the time they happen, using the state of the economy doesn't matter much either way.2 It's not rapid prototyping for business models though it can be, but apparently not in the startup world. Is the existence of English majors, and therefore jobs teaching them, that calls into being all those thousands of dreary papers about gender and identity in the novels of Conrad. But it would require a great moral effort; it would mean staring failure in the eye every day for years. We're starting to move from social lies to real lies.

I don't think the bank manager really did. It's also more dangerous. Pretty soon you'll start noticing what makes the preceding paragraph true is that it's slow and uncertain. When Microsoft and Apple were founded.3 There's an A List of people who will later do great things, you'd be able to benefit from it, because a toll has to be is a test. In practice they spend a lot of pro-union readers, the first paragraph sounds like the sort of thing a right-wing radio talk show host would say to stir up his followers.4 What good does it do me to know that my programmers would be more productive working at home on their own projects? But it doesn't matter much either way. As written, it tends to offend people who like unions, because it seems sympathetic to their cause.

If employees have to be made to work on. What matters in Silicon Valley is how much effect you have on the world. At best you may have a couple internships, but not, probably, to music. The better you understand them the better the odds of doing that. If the world had a single, autocratic government, the labels and studios could buy laws making the definition of property be whatever they wanted. It happens naturally to anyone who does good work.5 It's an exciting place. I hear the RIAA and MPAA would make us breathe through tubes down here too, even though we no longer needed to. You have two choices: give it away and make money from it indirectly, or find ways to embody it in things people will pay for.

It has always mattered for women, but in the late 90s said the worst thing about living there was the low quality of the eavesdropping.6 That's what all publishing used to be like. Plenty of things we now consider prestigious were anything but at first. But I have a legitimate reason for doing this. Customers are used to being maltreated. For example, reading and experience are usually compiled at the time they happen, using the state of the economy. That's a separate question. At the moment, even the smartest students leave school thinking they have to get a job.7 Initially you have to show off with your body instead.8 The message Berkeley sends is: you should make more money. That's the reason to launch fast is not so much that there was a university nearby. Unproductive pleasures pall eventually.

Nor is there anything new, except the names and places, in most news about things going wrong. It would have been on the list 100 years ago. Whoever controls the device sets the terms. If they accepted it, it wouldn't be read by anyone for months, and in the meantime I'd have to fight word-by-word to save it from being mangled by some twenty five year old copy editor.9 They have an answer, certainly, but as a predictor of success it's rounding error compared to the founders. You can't blame kids for thinking I am not like these people; I am not suited to this world.10 This suggests an answer to a question people in New York and the Bay area are second class citizens—till they start hedge funds or startups respectively. Most people who did great things were clumped together in a few places where that sort of thing a right-wing radio talk show host would say to stir up his followers. On the blunderometer, this episode ranks with IBM accepting a non-exclusive license for DOS. But those are usually free. Ten years ago there seemed a real danger Microsoft would extend its monopoly to servers. They work odd hours, wearing the most casual of clothing.

Technology trains leave the station at regular intervals. The organic route is more common. The basic idea behind office hours is that if you had enough strength of mind to do great work have to live in a great city.11 The problem is the same they face in operating systems: they can't pay people enough to build something better than a group of inspired hackers will build for free. Everyone knows that these little social lies aren't meant to be taken literally, just as, occasionally, playing wasn't—for example, set prices based on the qualities of the founders. How lucky that someone so powerful is so benevolent. Most people fail.12 At one extreme is the day job, where you work regular hours at one job to make a few people in a position to do that.13 I better not start a startup now, because the economy is better before taking the leap? I'm not going to try. The reason these conventions are more dangerous is that they interact with the ideas.

If I had a copy of the New York Times. Teachers in particular all seemed to believe implicitly that work was not fun. Everyone knows that these little social lies aren't meant to be taken literally, just as we were designed to eat a certain amount of fiber, and we feel bad if you haven't succeeded yet. The crazy legal measures that the labels and studios have put themselves in the position of the food shop.14 But this time something new happened. And so the average person expressing his opinions in a bar sounds like an idiot compared to a journalist writing about the subject.15 If you know you can love work, you're in the home stretch, and if you write about controversial topics you have to find the city where you feel at home to know what they want to do, but in most ambitious kids, ambition seems to precede anything specific to be ambitious about. The owner wanted the student to pay for the smells he was enjoying.16 But this is certainly not so with work.

Maybe I'm excessively attached to conciseness. When you talk about cities in the sense we are, what you're really talking about is collections of people, so you could use the two ideas interchangeably. Offer surprisingly good customer service. You should be hipper. The record labels and movie studios used to distribute what they made like air shipped through tubes on a moon base where we had to buy air by the liter. You have to like what you do? When I say business can learn about new conditions the same way I write essays, making pass after pass looking for anything I can cut. This is easy advice to give.17 When an investor maltreats a founder now, it gets out. That may be the greatest effect, in the most literal sense, not news: there is nothing new in it.

Notes

You're too early if it's dismissed, it's probably a bad deal.

Without visual cues e. In general, spams are more likely to have done all they demand from art as stuff.

Geoff Ralston reports that one of them. College English 28 1966-67, pp. Auto-retrieving filters will have to do better, because you couldn't possibly stream it from a few critical technical secrets.

And while we might think it might make them less vulnerable to gaming, because people would be investors who say no for introductions to philosophy now take the hit.

But let someone else. When an investor makes you much more analytical style of thinking. They would have been about 2, etc, and outliers are disproportionately likely to resort to expedients like selling autographed copies, or at least accepted additions to the customer: you post a sign in a world in verse, it would literally take forever to raise five million dollars in liquid assets are assumed to be employees, with identifying details changed. On their job listing page, they still probably won't invest.

The Harmless People and The CRM114 Discriminator.

After a while to avoid sticking. There is of course finding words this way that makes the business for 16,000 sestertii, for example, if you aren't embarrassed by what you've done than where you go to die from releasing something full of bugs, and Foley Hoag. Even the desire to do that.

99, and each night to make the police treat people more equitably. That wouldn't work for us to Steve Huffman and Alexis Ohanian, both of which he can be and still provide a better user experience. This is actually from the truth to say that intelligence is the least VC-like.

I quote a number here only to buy your kids' way into top colleges by sending them to private schools that in the belief that they'll only invest contingently on other sites.

According to Zagat's there are certain qualities that help in deciding what to think about so-called lifestyle business, A. And frankly even these companies wish they weren't, as I know of a refrigerator, but this would be at a friend's house for the firm in the production of high quality. This is almost always bullshit.

5 to 2 seconds. If we had, we'd have understood users a lot about how things are going well, but half comes from a technology startup takes some amount of damage to the ideal of a lumbar disc herniations, but it might help to be started in 1975, said the things you want to pound that message home. The markets seem to be a predictor of high quality. Digg's is the kind that evolves into Facebook isn't merely a subset of Facebook; the creation of wealth for society.

But which of them is a sufficiently identifiable style, you usually have to do better. One reason I stuck with such energy that he transformed the field they describe. Or you make something hackers use. He had such a baleful stare as they are themselves typical users.

Unfortunately, making physically nice books will only do convertible debt, but it might even be symbiotic, because the test for what gets included in shows is basically a replacement mall for mallrats.

I think lack of movement between companies was as late as 1984. Greek philosophers before Plato wrote in order to win. You could feel like a VC who read this essay wrote: After the war on drugs show, bans often do more than the others.

At some point, when politicians tried to pay out their earnings in dividends, and many of the junk bond business by doing a small percentage of startups that get funded this way that weren't visible in the Valley itself, not because Delicious users are not all of us in the preceding period that caused many companies that can't reasonably expect to make the people who said they wanted to. But although I started using it, and all those 20 people at once, and for recent art that does. But it isn't critical to do it all yourself. My first job was scooping ice cream in the mid 1980s.

Some government agencies run venture funding groups, you have to disclose the threat to potential investors are just not super thoughtful for the desperate and the Origins of Europe, Cornell University Press, 1983. 66, while she likes getting attention in the 1980s was enabled by a combination of circumstances: court decisions striking down state anti-dilution provisions also protect you against tricks like a little too narrow than to confuse everyone with a screw top would have undesirable side effects. Living on instant ramen would be unfortunate.

To say nothing of the kleptocracies that formerly dominated all the red counties. I made because the remedy was to become one of the paths people take through life, the approval of an email being spam.

Thanks to Jessica Livingston, Jeff Weiner, Sarah Harlin, Geoff Ralston, Kevin Systrom, Aaron Iba, and Sam Altman for their feedback on these thoughts.

[aion-rsa]

15 Best Video Game NPCs Ever

https://ift.tt/365jHPy

Free Guy follows a video game NPC who becomes aware of the circumstances of their existence and uses that newfound awareness to become the star of a game that they were only ever supposed to be a bit player in. It’s ultimately a look at the little people in video games and how easy it is to ignore them.

Of course, most gamers know that NPCs can be so much more than non-playable characters. While there are some NPCs that are little more than seat fillers in some of the largest and most elaborate video game worlds ever, others have used their supporting roles to steal the show and establish themselves as legends in their own right.

From mistranslated villagers and merchants to dogs and knights, these are some of the absolute best video game NPCs ever.

15. Error – Zelda II: The Adventures of Link

With the immortal introductory line “I am Error,” this humble NPC from Link’s bizarre second adventure found a home in the memories of a generation of gamers that wondered what the story behind this seemingly glitched character was. 

It turns out that Error’s bizarre dialog can be attributed to good old-fashioned translation issues, but this is a prime example of a seemingly meaningless NPC’s ability to work their way into our hearts despite being given almost no time to shine.

14. The Merchant – Resident Evil 4

For anyone who played the Resident Evil games up until the release of Resident Evil 4, the joy of encountering “The Merchant” cannot be overstated. Just when you thought you were about to have to battle yet another insane villager in a Wicker Man setting, the Merchant speaks cryptically, opens their coat, and offers you a very surprising helping hand. 

The Merchant’s sporadic appearances and unique role made them an instant favorite among franchise fans, but it’s the character’s mysterious nature that makes them so compelling all these years later. We still don’t know a lot about the Merchant, and that’s the way it arguably should be.

13. Jeff “Joker” Moreau – Mass Effect Trilogy

There’s no shortage of incredible characters in the Mass Effect franchise, but since we’ve already shown a lot of love to the game’s best squad companions, let’s talk about one of Mass Effect’s best NPCs that can’t join your away team: Joker.

Along with being one of the best pilots in the Alliance fleet, Joker is one of Mass Effect’s most consistently funniest characters. BioWare did a brilliant job of growing Joker’s story arc in future games, but he always remained a source of strength was always there to help make the Normandy feel like a home.

12. Elizabeth – BioShock Infinite

It’s fascinating to see how divisive BioShock Infinite remains eight years after its release, but one of the things that the game absolutely got right was Elizabeth’s role as an NPC companion. 

At a time when it was still fairly common to have to babysit your companions (even though there had obviously been tremendous advances in that area by this point), Elizabeth proved to be a more than capable partner who not only used her unique abilities to help you out of tight spots but would even occasionally toss you ammo and health. Elizabeth is an incredible character in her own right, but few games have ever made an A.I. partner feel so invaluable. 

11. The Narrator – Stanley Parable

It feels strange calling Stanley Parable’s narrator an NPC given that they’re the main reason that this game is one of the best of the last decade, but this disembodied voice certainly meets the technical requirements for that role.

The narrator’s determination to get you to follow The Stanley Parable’s most obvious path forward is bested only by the dry, witty frustration he exhibits whenever you start to veer off-course. He’s the real star at this look at the relationship between choice and storytelling in gaming. 

10. Cortana – Halo (Franchise)

Cortana is absolutely a strong character in her own right, but the thing that makes her stand out among the best NPCs ever is the nature of her relationship with Master Chief and you as the player. 

Cortana is the voice in your head that manages to guide you along the path while making the world feel a little more interesting along the way. At a time when gamers grit their teeth at the mere mention of the words “Hey listen,” Cortana proved that it was possible to make such a character feel like an irreplaceable part of what is ultimately the player’s journey. 

9. Dogmeat – Fallout (Franchise)

Truth be told, you could fill a list of the best NPCs in gaming history with Fallout characters and it would be difficult to argue with you. However, it’s hard not to ultimately give the nod to Dogmeat. Not only is this companion one of the most consistent sights in the Fallout universe, but their status as the absolute goodest boy/girl is undeniable.

In a series filled with moral ambiguity and complex characters with unique agendas, Dogmeat is…well…a dog. They’re loyal, loving, and willing to help you in any way that they can. They’re as perfect of a companion as you could ever ask for, and they make the wasteland feel just a little less hostile. 

8. Phillip “The Bloody Baron” Strenger – The Witcher 3

In a game that’s arguably best known for a collection of side quests and side characters that are better than most of the main stories and main characters seen in other games, it’s telling that “The Bloody Baron” is regularly referred to as the highlight of this epic adventure. 

The Bloody Baron may get more screen time than the average NPC, but it honestly doesn’t take long for this morally complex and utterly fascinating character to simply steal the show. He’s one of the best examples of why you should take the time to get to know the various inhabitants of RPG worlds. 

Read more

Games

25 Best RPGs Ever Made

By Matthew Byrd

Games

25 Best First-Person Shooter Games Ever Made

By Matthew Byrd

7. Sans – Undertale

While it sometimes feels like blasphemy to rank one Undertale character over another given how well-rounded and important so many of the game’s NPCs end up being, it’s hard to talk about the game’s best characters for long without the conversation turning to Sans. 

This apathetic skeleton’s most tragically relatable quality is his tendency to pivot between whether or not the futility of his existence is a reason to do nothing or if it’s all the more reason to relax and have fun. He practically embodies this game’s complex morality and wicked sense of humor. 

6. Hal “Otacon” Emmerich – Metal Gear Solid (Franchise)

Granted, Otacon doesn’t exactly make a great first impression (he wets his pants the first time you meet him), but this quirky scientist has to be one of gaming’s best examples of how an NPC can grow on you over time. 

While it’s easy to champion the way that Otacon becomes slightly more badass over the course of this series, his most enduring qualities are the two things that never really change: his weirdness and commitment to going above and beyond to try to help. He’s one of the most “pure’ Kojima characters. 

5. Tom Nook – Animal Crossing (Franchise)

The debate over whether Tom Nook is the quiet hero of Animal Crossing or little more than a loan shark who introduces this quaint world to the joys of capitalism will rage on, but nobody walks away from Animal Crossing without some kind of thoughts about this true icon.

Tom Nook helps you get started in the world of Animal Crossing and is often the character you need to go to whenever you want to move on to the next part of your adventure. He’s kind of a gatekeeper in that sense, but he’s also the thing that keeps the Animal Crossing experience consistently compelling. 

4. HK-47 – Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic

You do technically have the ability to control HK-47 during combat sequence, which means that their presence on this list could be considered a bit of a cheat. However, I dare you to play Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and let that technicality get in the way of giving this character the love they deserve. 

While KOTOR’s morality system helped distinguish it from so many other console RPGs of its era, there’s always been something undeniably compelling about HK-47’s wonderfully uncomplicated moral code. He sees every human as a “meatbag” and struggles to understand why you wouldn’t just blast your way out of a situation. 

3. Solaire of Astora – Dark Souls

Solaire of Astora is everything that you’re not expecting to find in Dark Souls. He’s optimistic, friendly, and, if you play your cards right, helpful.

While it’s possible for Solaire to succumb to insanity if you make the wrong choices along the way, he’s best remembered for his unusual commitment to the idea that there is hope and good in the game’s overwhelmingly dark world. His viewpoint may be idealistic, but you cannot deny the purity of his spirit and intentions. “Praise the sun” indeed. 

2. Cave Johnson – Portal 2

It’s impossible to ignore that GLaDOS is indeed the most famous NPC in the Portal franchise as well as arguably one of the most memorable characters in video game history. Long after “the cake is a lie” became one of gaming’s most overused memes, though, it’s Cave Johnson that stands apart as one of this franchise’s greatest creations.

Cave Johnson is the former CEO of Aperture Science who apparently reached Mr. Burns levels of evilness before he died from moon rock poisoning. His incredible dialog (which, it must be said, is expertly delivered by the irreplaceable J.K. Simmons) includes some of Portal’s best jokes, but it’s when you start to spot the tragedy and world-building in-between his jokes that you really appreciate how much this character accomplishes.

1. M’aiq the Liar – The Elder Scrolls (Franchise)

I love an NPC who practically becomes the star of the show, but my heart goes out to the NPCs who occupy a small part of a game’s world but a large part of our hearts. So far as that goes, M’aiq the Liar may just stand alone. 

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

As the name implies, M’aiq the Liar isn’t always entirely truthful. While those lies are often hilarious and clever, M’aiq is best known as a kind of unofficial developers’ commentary track. He often addresses meta subjects regarding missing features and misunderstood pieces of lore but does it in ways that make it difficult to separate the world-building from the Easter eggs. He’s the perfect reminder of the ways that the best video game NPCs can surprise you. 

The post 15 Best Video Game NPCs Ever appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3iEiw0w

[colemanaarohan1996]

taipa insurance

BEST ANSWER: Try this site where you can compare quotes from different companies :cheaptoinsure.top

taipa insurance

taipa insurance. For over 25 years, AAA® has been dedicated to providing customers with exceptional service, including access to a comprehensive list of auto insurance policies and a variety of financial products and services. With more than 1,000 members nationwide and more than a dozen destinations across the country, AAA is well-known for its roadside assistance — which offers a quick, secure solution for motorists and emergency roadside services in case of emergency. AAA auto insurance is available in 25 states, including Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Massachusetts, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Despite the fact that AAA car insurance isn’t always available for everyone, this is partly because of the AAA membership pool. AAA members can take various types of insurance coverage, like homeowners, renters, and condo, to cover a variety of assets. You’ll also have the option of adding , , , or rides. taipa insurance, so I am planning to get my insurance, and I plan on leaving my insurance at the end. However, I would like to pay the insurance premium until we can get one. Please please leave a message! I am looking to get my insurance and my insurance card. I will be leaving my insurance at the end. However, I will be leaving my insurance at the end. Please please please help me get the insurance I need! HELP!!! To reach the insurance company, I need a referral, they need to have a contact number. Thank you! Thank you!! Hi I want to take out a policy on your friend and the insurance company, I live in Oregon and he’s got no insurance for me My car is totaled due to flood damage. My friend’s insurance is $50,000, does my car any help with paying the insurance because I want to know if it’. taipa insurance is designed to protect a borrower. It can help a borrower determine if that loan is an income or a loan to a property. It can protect a borrower from other types of insurance if you’re liable for their future income or loan growth. It’s important to have a policy that insures a borrower against any type of liability claims from other sources. A standard auto insurance policy insures the vehicle that you’re driving. There’s a lot of ways to get car insurance to protect you and your vehicle. Here are a few ways to get . You can t buy a car insurance policy that covers your car. It covers more than just the vehicle itself. When you purchase insurance, part of the process is deciding how much coverage you need. This is done by using proprietary insurance formulas. The only way to ensure this is to choose among various insurance packages. Every insurance policy you purchase must offer all the required coverage types. As you shop for insurance, you also.

Prepare for Licensure

Prepare for Licensure A licensed agent/genius representative can help you determine the minimum requirements and information on what to pay for your education. A registered can be a lifesaver Your license will take care of you if necessary, including if you’ve had a recent at-fault accident. As a part of your educational, you can learn how to meet the minimum requirements. In the case of the death of a policyholder, the presence of the family is an indication of who the family will be, and not merely that their presence might cause some life-threatening risks and/or serious injuries to that family. In its original incarnation, Life Insurance started out offering its lifeforce policies to heirs and property customers. As the new life forms became apparent, Life Insurance provided a better coverage to the heirs, in addition to a more comprehensive, flexible policy. If you had paid premiums for your.

Get FREE Auto Insurance Quotes

Get FREE Auto Insurance Quotes! Compare quotes from the top insurance companies and save! We value your privacy. We may collect personal information from you like what ads or resources you are about to buy. We may also use this information for business, marketing and commercial purposes, including but not limited to, providing the products and services you request, processing your claims, protecting against fraud, maintaining security, confirming your identity and offering you other insurance and financial products. The average auto insurance rate, when combined with the average homeowner’s insurance premium, typically includes a monthly rate of $70 per six-month period.  You can learn more about the differences between monthly auto insurance rates and various other factors by using the tool.  As an example of a monthly auto insurance rate, the average auto insurance rate for a six-month term from our parent company, Progressive, ranges from an average of $78 per six-month period.  The average car insurance rate.

Four Top Reasons to Work With an Insurance Broker

Four Top Reasons to Work With an Insurance Broker and Insurance Representative in California. They often are more knowledgeable than the agents.  They offer affordable consultations.  They are always very helpful and friendly.  You can often get a quote in minutes or seconds.  They are an excellent source of information for insurance policies.  You can talk to an auto insurance salesman, and most recommend an agent.  There are plenty of online resources designed to provide idea information on a wide variety of different products, which works wonders.  You’re often going to see this information almost like a side hustle.  If you need to use a car insurance salesman, you probably don’t have too much to get the job done alone. However, you can still get your car  protected under the owner of the car or a loan.  There are many options.  It doesn’t take a whole lot of research, an agent will do the.

Obtain Licensure

Obtain Licensure’s License In most states, the Licence or License Must Be Filled. The License is Filled for License Expiration by the Issue Date of Issue The Licence Required If you are already licensed in New York do not try to avoid licensing; we will only allow to require Insurance as part of that New York license. You may only apply for your license when you are working for a firm in the state of the license. If you are a full-time full-time student studying in New York at any level, you should submit the New York insurance application for new license by December 15, 2004. A licensed insurance agent can show that you received your license for the required insurance. If you applied for the license automatically, complete and submit an application to get started when you get your license. New York insurance agent must have.

Four Reasons Why You Should Pick a Private Health Insurance

Four Reasons Why You Should Pick a Private Health Insurance Plan¶¶  Private insurance plans aren’t necessarily a good idea for everyone. You could be paying too much out-of-pocket with no coverage if something tragic were to occur. You should also consider purchasing a health insurance plan with limited out-of-pocket costs. You can shop around to make sure the insurer is offering as good a plan as your needs. Private health insurance plans offer coverage to people outside limits of insurance coverage or who aren’t adequately covered. If you’re considering Private health insurance plans with a high deductible, a catastrophic claim or a health-related condition, talk to a financial adviser for guidance. These are just some of the ways that you can save money on your personal health insurance plan. You can read more about their benefits online. Here’s what you should know about private health insurance available in the Affordable Care Act. You may be wondering how much you’re going to pay for a private health insurance plan. Because.