#about i assume radical water defenders

[clearancecreedwatersurvival]

More people should watch the Santa Clarita Diet tbh, they either got cancelled by Netflix because of the plotline where the kids do an eco terrorism or they got cancelled and decided to put teenagers doing eco terrorism in their final season, and both of those options are pretty great tbh.

[open-hearth-rpg]

Magic Combinations: Great RPG Mechanics #RPGMechanics: Week Six

There are some mechanics where I love for the systems they exist in, but I’m not sure they could be adapted elsewhere. Ars Magica is the poster child of that for me. I adore the idea of Ars– I’ve picked up books from every edition. While I only ever managed to play campaigns using third edition, it remains with me powerfully. 

I’m going to leave aside a ton of material from Ars here: the framework, troupe play, covenant building, magical research, etc. It has a huge number of innovations; some iterated on and some that remained unique to that game. As befits a game about wizards, it is the magic system that does radical things. 

Ars has players gaining skill points for using magic on two axis lines. The first are five Techniques. These describe actions (create, perceive, transform, destroy, and control). The second are fifteen Forms, which describes subjects (animal, air, water, body, mind, etc). The combination of these defines generally what a spell can do. So if you want to shift dirt, you use Muto (transform) and Terram (earth). If you want to read someone’s emotions you use Intellego (perceive) and Mentem (mind). 

Your potential level of effect is limited by your invested ranks in the different forms and techniques. The Ars Magica rules contain a host of spells broken down into those forms with details on effect, power, and minimum skill. It’s a lot. But characters, more dangerously, can also improvise effects based on those combinations. It’s significantly more difficult. Some of the main focus of play revolves around your wizards developing new spells and researching to make them repeatable rotes which can be used and spread. 

Conceptually breaking down magic is this way is great: it feels right in a Western, mechanistic approach, even though we’re working with magic. There’s a long tradition of spell systems (Master of the Five Magics, Earthsea, The Face in the Frost, etc) with particular logics. Ars Magica one offers a universal and easily understood one that breaks everything down into particulars– a non-holistic approach to mysticism. 

But to do that requires a lot of text and rules. You have to define the kinds of effects which can happen at the different ranks. You have to consider the limitations of duration, casting time, # of targets, etc. You have to present a list of example, pre-created spells– basically a new version of the D&D spell collections reorganized. It seems to require complexity. But some have tried to make it less complex and ended up with something else. 

Mage: The Ascension for example. When we first heard about Mage, everyone assumed it would be a modern updating of Ars. After all at the time White Wolf had the rights to Ars and had already added elements of its backstory to the tale of vampire clan Tremere. But when it arrived, Mage had stripped away the concept of techniques and focused on forms, called spheres. The combination of those spheres became the focus, with players developing rotes which could be repeated. 

I don’t think it was intended as a simplification of Ars. And it certainly isn’t. If you’ve seen the latest version of Mage you know that. There’s a whole book just trying to explain more clearly how you actually use the magic system in play. 

The question is: can you have a fun and playable combination magic system with a modern, rules-lighter storygame? I’m not sure. I’ve run a couple of campaigns of a PbtA hack of Mage. It’s a decent one– written by someone with a real love of the source material. But it feels wobbly. Casting spells requires calculating a bunch of modifiers. The definitions of the spheres are at once vague and also restrictive. 

We’ve tried a hack of it for Fate. In this case the techniques become the basic actions of the system (attack, defend, overcome, create advantage) and those are combined with different elements: Fire, Spirit, Illusion, etc. For this we had a general spell casting skill– though we’d also tried it with individual ratings for the forms and techniques. In one version, players had a matrix of what they knew (Attack: Water, Defend: Plant, etc) and for each one they picked, they had to choose one they didn’t learn.

This worked OK– but the challenge of these abstract approaches is that the forms all seem equivalent. If you can achieve the same Attack results with Fire, Air, and Earth, why would you specialize? Also how do you handle improvised magic versus learned rotes? Do you have a list of spells you know or do you have a penalty for on-the-fly casting? It opens a deep hole of complexity and record-keeping which goes against some of the simplicity of modern games. 

I’m sure others have played around with this– I know of at least one Forged in the Dark hack of Ars Magica. And I’ve always wondered what a Free from the Yoke version of the setting would look like. But I’m unsure if I could make it work: it may well be that fun of working out those vast combinations always comes with a cost in complexity for play.

[candyfloss-techno-hell]

I saw your ask post about Roger being dismissive about regimes that are anti-u.s. Are you still a fan though?

Not quite what I said. I said he was dismissive of the wrong done by some regimes that are anti-us, for the sole reason that they are anti-us. Basically the 'enemies of my enemies are my friends' mindset, coupled with the easy mental strategy of automatically accusing the entity that's already been found guilty many times [the US], so that way there's only ONE (1) villain to rail against and everything is so much more simple.

Of course I'm still a fan. I don't see how Roger being mistaken on this topic, however big the mistake, negates the importance and depth of the fantastically naked lyrics & poems he's written, the beautiful simplicity of his music and the sincerity of his advocacy for the cause of the Palestinians, the indigenous people of Ecuador or for Julian Assange.

If I suddenly decided he was a bad person for being wrong about Ukraine, that would be cancelling, and a very stupid, sketchy, immature and kinda peer pressure-driven behaviour. I think people who do this not only have a serious lack of understanding in the complexity of human beings and how opinions work, but also have (or had) some kind of unhealthy, idealizing parasocial relationship w/ Roger. What I mean is, when you've attached yourself to a celebrity -whom, naturally, you don't truly know much about- in a way that fills some kind of emotional void in your psyche, placed them on a pedestal of imagined virtues, and filled in the blanks of the mystery that is their private life and true persona with opinions & traits that suit your views & ego like they're your richer, more talented, morally perfect alter ago, and this to such an extent that you end up subconsciously assuming they agree with you on everything, then of course, the feeling of betrayal when you learn they are flawed or simply that their cognition is independant from yours must be very intense.

Look at the people in the roger waters tag, going "I knew he was a asshat/shitty person/bastard, because : a lot of songs he wrote when in PF are about himself (how dare he, the effing megalomaniac) / he gives his opinion more often than I'd like him to / Gilmour says he's an asshole and because I prefer listening to Gilmour's music I'll just assume he's right / He made decisions I don't understand and because I don't like him I'll assume they were motivated by hate / I personally don't like his personality/music and have therefore decided he's a bad person", etc. (When it's not simply recourse to the idiotic, meaningless concept of westplaining ... "YoU cAn'T dIsAgrReE wItH NoN-wEsTeRn cOuNtRiEs On ThEiR oWn pOliCiEs cAuSe tHeY hAvE LeSS iNfLuEnCe sO iT's UnFaIr !!😡" ) Those are the only 'justifications' I've seen so far for cancelling Roger. Pretty pathetic tbh. Though his words are the object of discontent, they are almost never criticized directly. Negative comments on social media are always ad hominem attacks. I wonder if they even bother to read the statements tbh. These people are obviously frustrated in some weird entitled way, and incapable of constructive criticism.

My understanding of Roger's problem is that he's surrounded himself & attached himself over the years with people & news outlets that are not telling him the full truth, and in true Roger Waters fashion, he'll defend them and their views unfailingly. That's how he is, once he believes in something he goes the whole. effing. hog. He's a very 'whole' person, if that makes sense, which is both a curse and a blessing. Probably, he was galvanized by their radical anti-US stance, and either out of naivety or dishonesty -probably both-, didn't pay attention to their questionable connections. The subtlety in this issue is that, even if the portrayal of the horrors of US politics in Russian & Chinese gov-owned media turns out to be 100% correct, it absolutely doesn't mean it can't still be part of a propaganda scheme. Manipulators can and will state genuine facts in order to appear truthful & encourage adherence to their entire agenda. The thing is, no one makes the effort to engage in calm, honest debate with him and explain to him exactly why he's wrong. It's always : he's oBviOuSLy wrong and also he's a prick, end of. Even Zelenska's response was basically this. Despite the fact that Roger wants to have that debate and has asked to be corrected in previous messages. One has to give him that...

TL;DR = Roger needs to grow up & learn that even liars can sometimes tell the truth. People on the Internet need to grow up & learn that even good, sane people can be very wrong but still have positive things to contribute.

[avengersassemble-fics]

Stark Legacy

part 03/?? "you knew?"

previous part // next part

master list

word count 4.3k

It seemed like no matter what, whatever mission involved Sam and Bucky went south. Quickly. What was supposed to be an intel mission involving Wilfred Nagel turned into Zemo murdering him, and then it rained gunfire and explosions.

You had managed to get some information out of him: the CIA had recruited him after HYDRA fell, but after being dusted he was approached by the Power Broker, where he created twenty working serums that Karli now had for herself. It wasn’t good news, but it was something to work with.

And thanks to Zemo, he had a lead on Karli.

You rubbed at your neck as the group walked down a fairly barren street in Riga, Latvia. You were following Zemo’s lead to a place he said would be a safe haven during your time here. You wondered if there was time for a proper meal, or maybe even some rest. You fought back a yawn as you made it to Sam’s side as Zemo started to slow his pace in front of a building.

“We are here,” he stated and began to climb the stoop stairs and open the door. Sam followed behind him, as did you, but stopped when Bucky didn’t follow behind you. You turned back to look at him, and raised a brow,

“You good?” You asked and he pulled his gaze from behind him and to you and nodded.

“I’m fine, I’ll see you guys in a bit,” he replied. Without waiting for a response, Bucky began to head back away from you and you shook your head.

Whatever. A shower was calling your name anyway. You took the stairs by two and caught up with Zemo and Sam as they were entering Zemo’s apartment. You took a look around, it was fairly empty, but your eyes landed on the bathroom off the main room.

“Clothes?” You asked as Zemo was pouring himself a drink.

“Oeznik had our things dropped off,” Zemo simply stated. You looked around the room again and spotted your bag on a chair, and you were quick to grab it and bring it with you into the bathroom. You shut the door, locked it, and were eager to get into a hot shower.

As soon as the water hit your back you sighed happily. You could feel the tender spots the water hit and assumed bruises must be forming, and you tried to focus on something other than what had been happening the last few days. You wondered how the neighbor’s kid was doing, if his dad was doing right with him, and a pang of guilt shot through your heart about Morgan.

You’re selfish.

As soon as the words entered your mind, as if said by another voice, you finished your shower and shut the water off. Wrapping yourself in a towel, you carefully padded over the tile in the bathroom and into the connected room and rustled through your bag for something to wear. You were thankful for some alone time, and for the two men insisting you get the room to yourself while they took the couches, because it allowed you a little bit of peace.

You changed into some jeans and a shirt, but covered it with a black bomber jacket Natasha had given you after admiring one of hers. God that felt like forever ago. As you put some heels boots on, and searched for something in your bag, your fingers grazed what felt like paper. Carefully, you pulled it out and your stomach dropped at the sight.

It was folded in half, but you knew exactly what it was before unraveling it. You swore you had cleaned this bag out months ago, but clearly you were (probably drunkenly) mistaken. The colorful picture was stained along the edge, probably also your fault, but the couple in it was crystal clear.

You fought hard to not think of Steve, and yet here was a painful reminder of what you had and what you lost. You found yourself walking towards the doors that faced the outside, and easily pushed them open to reveal a terrace. The air hit you hard, but it was refreshing because your mind was racing.

You remembered the exact moment the photo was taken. It was early into the relationship, the “bad date” streak seemed to have ended, and everyone decided to go incognito to a county fair that was happening half an hour from the compound. It was a master plan from Nat, Wanda, and yourself, and thankfully everyone agreed to some R&R. It was a flawless plan, if everyone just wore caps and kept their presence on the downlow, no one would even notice.

It worked for the most part, until this photo was taken. As you leaned against the railing and looked down at the photo, you remembered how happy you were. Wanda had taken it, Vision overlooking her shoulder, and almost immediately after a kid recognized Steve. Ever being a gentleman, he agreed to signing something (you couldn’t remember what) and that’s when word spread that the Avengers were there. You rubbed your thumb over Steve’s image, and as much as you wanted to… You just couldn’t bring yourself to crumple the picture and toss it away.

Below, Bucky was making his way back to the apartment, and his mind was running as well. He knew the Dora Milaje would realize what happened with Zemo, but he didn’t expect them to find the group so fast. He needed to tell Sam about it, and as he rounded the corner he slowed his pace when he saw you outside on one of the terraces.

Bucky watched you deep in thought, staring at something in your hand. He could see the conflict in your eyes as they shifted over whatever you were looking at, he could make out your fingers tracing over what you were holding, but then you folded it up and shoved it into your pocket. At that moment you looked out over the buildings, but then realized he had been watching you. You looked him over, and took a step back into the room, and the terrace doors closed. Bucky took a deep breath and headed into the building, climbing the stairs by two until he could hear bickering on the other side of the door.

Yup, he knew this was where he needed to be. Bucky pushed open the door and walked inside, removing his jacket as the door closed behind him.

“And I’m saying that it's none of your business,” Bucky heard you saying as he entered the main room, and tossed his jacket over the couch. He continued to the kitchenette, and poured himself a drink.

“It was just a simple question,” Zemo stated and you huffed at that.

“A simple question is asking me what my favorite color is, not asking me what my reconditioning was like under HYDRA,” you said. Bucky sipped at his drink, and set the glass down at the mention.

“Back off Zemo,” Bucky warned. Sam entered the room at just the right moment, and Bucky shook his head. “The Wakandans are here and they want Zemo. But I bought us some more time.”

“Were you followed?” Sam asked and Bucky downed the rest of his drink, and he wished he could feel the effects even just a little.

“No,” Bucky confirmed, and you crossed your arms in front of you.

“How can you be so sure?” Zemo asked beside you.

“‘Cause I know when I’m being followed,” Bucky said and you narrowed your eyes at him. Don’t say it, don’t say it—

“Unlike some people,” Bucky added and you huffed.

“I heard that,” you confirmed and Bucky smirked at you.

“I wanted you to.”

“It was nice of you to defend me at least,” Zemo poked at the situation. You rolled your eyes at that.

“I don’t think anyone is defending you, you murdered Nagel,” you pointed out, to which Zemo just shrugged.

“Do we really have to litigate what may or may not have happened?” Zemo asked.

“There’s nothing to litigate,” Sam jumped in. “You straight shot the man.”

Bucky felt his phone buzz in his pocket, and pulled it out as the three people around him continued to talk, or borderline argue. He wasn’t prepared to see what the trending news was, and he looked over at Sam.

“Sam,” Bucky cut everyone off. “Karli bombed a GRC supply depot.”

“What?” Sam asked, and Bucky offered his phone to him. “What’s the damage?”

“Eleven injured, three dead. They have a list of demands and are promising more attacks if the demands aren’t met,” Bucky said and Sam read over the words on his own, and sighed.

“She’s getting worse,” Zemo offered his wisdom. “I have the will to complete this mission, but do you?”

“She’s just a kid,” Sam argued back and you shrugged your shoulders.

“Sam, she just bombed a building. I respect their mission, but the execution isn’t right,” you offered and you noticed Bucky nod slightly at your input. Zemo shook his head.

“You’re seeing something that isn’t there, you’re clouded by it. She’s a supremacist,” Zemo pointed out. “The very concept of a super soldier will always trouble people. It’s that warped aspiration toon that led to the Nazis, to Ultron, to the Avengers.”

“The Avengers aren’t Nazis,” you defended. “Karli, the Flag Smashers, they aren’t Nazi’s either. They may be radicalized but there’s gotta be a peaceful way to stop her.”

“She’s right,” Sam agreed. “We can find out where she is, and let me talk to her, let me get through to her.”

“He is the most sound out of all of us,” you agreed. “Between a master manipulator and two ex-HYDRA agents.”

“She will escalate until you kill her,” Zemo disagreed. “Or she kills you.”

“Maybe you’re wrong Zemo,” Bucky argued. “Maybe I should just hand you over to the Wakandans right now.”

“It would be the first thing I agreed with you on during this mission,” you mumbled quietly, but didn’t miss the pointedly look you received from Bucky.

“You would give up your tour guide?” Zemo asked, and you couldn’t help but roll your eyes.

“Don’t tempt us,” Sam interjected. He handed Bucky his phone back and let out a sigh. “Look the sooner we find Karli, the better. We don’t know how close Walker and Hoskins are on our tails.”

You had no luck. Anyone you had come across and questioned about Donya Madani, they looked you over and after a brief moment of recognition, they left without a word. You sighed, and after the allotted time Sam gave, you made your way to the meet point, hoping that the others had better luck than yourself. You shoved your hands into the pockets of your bomber jacket, heeled boots echoing off the walls, and you tried your best to ignore the passersby who stopped to take a second glance at you. You were starting to wonder why in the world Sam and Bucky thought it would be a good idea for you to tag along on this. What did you really offer besides more unwanted attention? You were starting to see what Tony meant when he protected you from so long before the media was informed of your rescue--

You were about to pass an alleyway when Bucky appeared on the street. You stopped for a moment as you both realized you were headed the same way, but after a few seconds you continued on and Bucky joined you by your side. He noticed almost immediately the second glances you were receiving. “Are you alright?”

“Just peachy,” you replied sarcastically. “I’m not assuming you happened to do any better than I did?”

“I got nothing,” Bucky admitted as you both neared the rendezvous point. “With our luck, Zemo is the one who got the meet point.”

“Which means having to convince the Wakandans to give us more time,” you sounded off almost to yourself and Bucky nodded a bit. “I’ll let you in your ever great wisdom handle that.”

“Still working on that,” Bucky mumbled as Sam came into view. Sam took his eyes of Zemo, who was talking to a group of kids, and glanced over at you two finally joining the party.

“Any luck?” Sam asked the two of you.

“No,” you admitted in unison. Bucky and you shared a glance before you shook your head and joined Sam’s side.

“As soon as they recognized who I was they bolted,” you admitted and Sam let out a small hmm. You nodded your head at Zemo who was standing from his seat and about to rejoin the group. “He seems to have all the answers so far.”

“Yeah, don’t remind me,” Sam said below his breath as Zemo got closer. “That little girl, what’d she tell you?”

“The funeral is this afternoon,” Zemo admitted. He looked back at the group of kids, and shared a knowing look with the girl he was talking to. “Let’s not talk here.”

The walk back to Zemo’s apartment was quicker than last time, Bucky was glancing over his shoulder and looking around for any sign of the Dora Milaje. He huffed when the group entered the building, and came in last when he was sure he wasn’t being followed. “Alright Zemo, tell us everything you got.”

“The funeral is this afternoon,” Zemo replied and you plopped down on the couch and tucked a leg under yourself.

“Alright but where,” you tried to push. “You know the Wakandans are probably lurking outside this place, right?”

“Hmm,” Zemo toyed as he poured himself a drink. “I prefer to keep my leverage.”

Bucky suddenly charged forward and tore the glass from Zemo’s hand, and chucked it at the wall. Sam and you were quick on your feet as Bucky closed the gap between the two. “You wanna see what someone can do with leverage?”

“Take it easy,” Sam warned as he stepped between the two. He nudged Bucky backwards and you stood by his side, and looked him over. He fists were tightened, he had his brows furrowed into a glare, and there was a faint trickle of sweat that ran down his neck. He was angry, and you sort of understood when it came to Zemo. “Don’t engage him Bucky. He’s just gonna extort you.”

“And do that stupid head tilt thing,” you added. Bucky seemed to loosen up and glance at you, and you offered a knowing nod. He let out a small sigh and Zemo removed himself from the situation, and Sam clapped a hand on Bucky’s shoulder.

“I’m gonna make a call, make sure they don’t kill one another,” Sam instructed you. You couldn’t help the grin that formed over your face as Sam walked out the room and you crossed your arms over your chest.

“Well well well, look who’s in charge now,” you teased. Bucky directed his glare at you and you shrugged. “I hate to say it, but you asked for this.”

Bucky scoffed and his head fell back a little, it almost looked like he was fighting back a smile. “For Zemo or for you?”

“Technically both,” you pointed out. Bucky stared at you for a moment before sighing and moving around you to sit on the couch in the room. You looked over at Zemo who was dipping a tea bag into a mug, and you looked over at Bucky and inwardly sighed. You made your way over and sat next to him, which made him sit up a bit more.

“There’s something else going on in that head of yours,” you said quietly. You could see the gears practically turning in his head, his eyes were shifting over the room, and you sat back against the cushions. You weren’t really expecting him to open up to you, given all the tension there had been between you both so far. But when he sat back as well and looked over at you, you were pretty surprised.

“I went and broke the trust of the people who helped me get my mind right,” Bucky stated softly. You blinked at him as he looked you over for a moment. He glanced back at Zemo who was taking a sip of his tea and shook his head before looking back at you. “I just hope it was worth it.”

You thought about it for a second, and Bucky sighed and looked back at the floor. You sucked in a breath and looked down at the pocket you had shoved your photo into earlier that day.

“The things you’ve taken from them don’t make you a bad person,” you recited from what you had been told. Bucky looked over at you and you met his gaze and you shrugged your shoulders. “So when this is all over just… Do something to make it right, Barnes.”

Bucky looked you over, seeing your hands fidgeting in your lap. He knew where the words probably came from, and Bucky felt compelled to ask you something. “Why are you still upset with Steve?”

You froze in place, your eyes shooting up to meet Bucky’s stare. You tilted your head a bit and fought back a laugh… Was he really doing this right now?

“That’s none of your business,” you stated. You stood from your place and started to head back to your designated room, but Bucky decided to follow.

“He was my best friend,” Bucky stated as he walked behind you and you scoffed.

“Oh trust me, no one ever let me forget that,” you said. You spun around to face him and you motioned your hand at him. “What is this? I was trying to be nice and you’re coming at me like this?”

“I’m not coming at you any way,” Bucky argued and took a step closer. “But I want to understand. Steve made it pretty clear when he told me about Peggy that you two just didn’t work out-“

“What?” You asked. Bucky stopped talking as your face fell, and you searched his face for an answer. “What do you mean he told you about Peggy?”

“When they got the stones, he told me about how he saw Peggy,” Bucky explained. When you still didn’t look like you knew what he was talking about, something finally clicked. “You didn’t know.”

“No,” you admitted. Bucky’s stomach folded, and he inwardly cursed that stupid punk, and he found himself taking a step towards you but you quickly looked at him and took a step back. “Wait. Wait a minute… You knew? You knew he wasn’t coming back?”

Bucky’s mouth opened to respond, but the front door opened and closed. The footsteps came closer, and Sam appeared behind Bucky. Sam slowed his steps as he happened upon the two of you staring at one another and he swore if Bucky did something stupid again, he wasn’t going to let him hear the end of it.

“We have eyes in the skies, but we need to get going,” Sam announced. You held Bucky’s gaze for only a few more moments before shaking your head. You moved around Bucky and past Sam, and Zemo was waiting at the door. You threw it open and walked out, only for Zemo to follow. Bucky slowly turned in his spot and looked over at Sam, who motioned at the direction you just left.

“What happened?” Sam asked. Bucky shook his head and started to walk towards Sam.

“Nothing, let’s go find Karli,” Bucky said. As he was about to pass Sam, he grabbed his vibranium arm and stopped Bucky non his tracks.

“What happened, Bucky,” Sam asked again. Bucky sighed and shook his head before looking straight ahead.

“I was wrong about something… Now I gotta make it right.”

John Walker was a bigger piece of work than Bucky was. Sam had asked for ten minutes to talk to Karli, so the rest of the Brady Bunch was waiting in some rickety back warehouse. Walker insisted on getting Zemo handcuffed to some piece of machinery, and he did not stop pacing back and forth since. His partner, Lemar Hoskins, was definitely more collected. Bucky? He was leaning in the door frame and staring at you.

You leaned against the wall and watched Walker pace in front of you. You were fiddling with your fingers, counting from one to ten on them to keep your mind busy. You ignored Bucky’s ever persistent stares, and you watched as Steve’s shield passed back and forth in front you. It was… Weird to see it on someone else’s back. Regardless of how Steve left things. It was just another reminder that he was supposed to be here.

Walker suddenly came to a stop and started towards the door. Bucky straightened himself and you couldn’t help but roll your eyes.

“It hasn’t been ten minutes, John,” Bucky informed him and Walker huffed and backed off. “Just sit tight.”

“Don’t do that,” Walker pressed. “Don’t patronize me.”

“He’s been doing a lot of that recently,” you said. Bucky sent a look your way, not mad or angry, but you shrugged your shoulders. “Sam knows what he’s doing, Walker.”

“I’m sorry why are you here again?” Walker asked and you chuckled.

“No idea,” you replied and pushed yourself off the wall.

“I’m going in,” Walker stated to Bucky and tried to move around him. Bucky stood his ground, and Walker huffed in annoyance.

“He knows what he’s doing,” Bucky said about Sam. Walker shook his head and you came up behind him.

“This is all just so easy for you, isn’t it?” He asked Bucky. You looked back at Hoskins, who was finally coming to offer some kind of assistance. “All that serum running through your veins… Barnes, your partner needs backup in there. Do you really want his blood on your hands?”

“You need to step back, Walker,” you said. Walker turned to face you and you looked him over, but stood your ground. “We didn’t come here to fight, and I’m sure as hell not letting you start one.”

He chuckled a bit and took a step closer to you. It was an act of intimidation, one that didn’t work on you at all. Not after going toe to toe with a psychotic purple titan.

“How do you expect to stop me?” Walker asked. You were ready to reply, but Bucky (of course) had to step in. He grabbed one of Walker’s arms, but Walker pulled it free. “Don’t touch me, Barnes.”

Walker finally pushed past Bucky, and Hoskins was after him trying to get his attention. You huffed, and finally met Bucky’s gaze and shook your head. You pushed past him too, and followed after the two hard headed men through the hallways until you finally managed to catch up.

“Karli Morgenthau, you’re under arrest,” Walker announced as he entered the room. When you finally got a view of the girl who has been the center of this whole mission, you were taken a back. Sure you had seen the footage and a picture here and there, but it was… Almost scary. You certainly had done far worse by her age.

“This is what that was?” Karli snapped at Sam as she took a couple steps back. Bucky finally joined your side and you grimaced as Sam tried to reason with her still.

“No, Karli wait-“ he tried to tell her. But she was not having any part of it.

“You tricked me until help came,” she more so stated and you couldn’t help but feel sorry for her.

Walker went to grab Karli, and Bucky moved to stop Lemar, but shit hit the fan quickly. Karli shoved Walker and Sam backwards into a table, and Bucky was quick after Karli. You rushed to Sam’s side and helped him re-steady himself. Sam clapped a hand on your back and motioned in a direction and you both rushed out the room. The place was like a maze, and you were trying to just make heads and tails of it. Sam mostly led the way, heading down some stairs into a darker place, and you heard footsteps incoming. Sam made sure to block you from whatever (or whoever) was coming, but Bucky rounded the corner.

“Shit,” you mumbled. Sam sighed in annoyance as well, and Bucky motioned his arms.

“I lost her,” Bucky stated and you shook your head.

“You guys were definitely right about Walker,” you commented. Just as the words left your lips, the noticeable sound of gunshots echoed in the air. You refocused on the direction Bucky had just come from, and you pushed past the two men. “This way!”

Finally, you were the voice of reason. You lead the way towards where you were very positive the shots had come from. You were nearly running, down stairs and through hallways until you came to a stop at the top of stairs, overlooking what now was Walker and Hoskins standing over a knocked out Zemo. Sam and Bucky moved around you to get closer to the scene, but eventually you did as well.

“What did we miss?” Sam asked.

Walker gave a simplified rundown, finding Zemo after shooting Karli. But one thing you couldn’t pinpoint as you overlooked the belt Karli used to house the remainder of the serums she had was it looked like there was at least one missing. If there were ten serums left… Why did you only count nine vials destroyed on the floor?

- - - - - - - - - -

taglist // message me to be added or feel free to add yourself!!

@elliee1497 @iizabxlla@bulbasor-charmander-2020@littlemoistcarrot@dottirose@meraki–mei@littledaph@fckdusername@bisexuwhale9669@mottergirl99@vxidnik@anabutnotpro@ilovesupersoldiers @incorrect-artist@caseymcflurry@robindoesntloveme@cherryara@fightforspring@annetries@petlaufeyson@weasleyisourjedi@loganrwebb @snarky–starky @emotionalcal @feelmyroarrrr @chewymoustachio @cass4nova @holy-rosewater @natdrunk @botchedzucchini @booksarebae2000​  @chelseaxaz @stealapizzamyheart @iamninaanna @xoxonotme @chrisevansiseverything @stupid-simp33 @ladydmalfoy @vamptori @sltwins @haideehaids @mischiefmanaged71 @starkleila @prettysbliss @healy-facedown @xkonpinkx @xxpapasfritasxx @fanofalltheficsx @pantaeudaimonia @feelmyroarrrr @loganrwebb @saint-marvel @crist1216 @wittysunflower @pistachoz @arctic-duchess

[revolutionary-demosthenes]

4th of July: John Laurens and Slavery, and why we shouldn’t idolize him

I’ve written several drafts of posts trying to explain John Laurens’s complicated relationship with slavery and, in a broader sense, how the hypocrisy of freedom for our country--while denying the freedom of enslaved people--has led directly to the situation we find ourselves in now, in terms of race in America.

I’ve struggled with even going there, because I’m trying to focus on the present now, not the past. But I firmly believe that America can only fix its present once we’ve faced our past. And I want this information on my blog. John Laurens was not a perfect man, not even close. He was an abolitionist, yes. But how he came to these views is complicated and his personal conduct towards African-Americans is often troubling. Too often, in fact, the racist ideas of his era are visible in his writings.

There’s lots out there about not glorifying or idolizing historical figures, such as Thomas Jefferson, Washington, and other slave-owners.

This is becoming particularly clear today, with the truth of violent systemic racism in America finally becoming more fully recognized. When people watch videos of a black man begging for his life under the knee of a policeman, that brutality becomes undeniable.

But John Laurens is often exempt from this “historical disclaimer” of sorts. In the world of the Hamilton fandom and even more broadly in history, he becomes The Abolitionist, a White Savior figure who abhorred slavery and fought for racial justice, no exceptions, no fine print.

But there is a fine print for John Laurens. And it is a vital one to examine, because it shows us the importance of carrying our beliefs into our personal lives, not just our political ones.

First, let’s acknowledge the circumstances John was born into.

South Carolina, where he was born in 1754, was a southern colony, and as such relied mainly on agriculture in its economy. The rich plantation owners were the pinnacle of society. Washington’s family is an example of one such rich and powerful plantation owning family. The wealth and standing in society of these men led to positions in the government. And a man who illustrates this perfectly is none other than Henry Laurens.

Henry Laurens, John Laurens’s father, was, despite his pleading to the contrary, a significant slave owner and slave trader. Though in his private life he claimed to dislike slavery, he co-owned the largest slave-trading house in North America, Austin & Laurens. It doesn’t matter what he thought, or claimed to think. What matters is what he did.

Henry Laurens owned between close to three hundred slaves. His attitude toward the treatment of his own slaves was dehumanizing, self-righteous, and willfully ignorant. He chose to look upon himself as a “good” slave owner, rather than actually face the horrors he was perpetrating. He wrote in a letter that he’d rather treat his slaves “with Humanity” and make “less Rice” than “submit to the Charge of one who should make twice as much rice & exercise any degree of Cruelty towards those poor Creatures who look up to their Master as their Father, their Guardian, & Protector.” What Henry is trying to say here (to my reading) is that he’d rather his plantation produce less of a crop and not work his slaves too hard than treat his slaves cruelly to produce more profit.

Henry Laurens, in an attitude that is all too familiar today,  consistently chose to think of himself as an exception to the problem rather than as part of the problem. He was quick to talk up abolition and condemn cruel treatment of enslaved people. But when it came to his own slaves, he insisted that “my Servants are as happy as Slavery will admit of, none run away, the greatest punishment to a defaulter is to sell him.”

I don’t know how John’s mother, Eleanor Ball Laurens, viewed slavery, but she also came from a large slave-owning family. Even if she personally didn’t approve of the practice wholeheartedly, she benefitted directly from slavery and married someone in the slave trade.

So this is the life John Laurens was born into. A life of incredible privilege, sourced directly from the the slave trade and the labor of kidnapped and enslaved Africans. This is the first thing that needs acknowledging in terms of John’s relationship with slavery. He was able to accomplish much of what he did because of his social standing and wealth as the son of a very powerful South Carolinian, powerful mostly because of his standing in Southern society.

John was able to get his education in Europe because of slavery. He was able to use his father’s influence to become an aide-de-camp to George Washington. His social standing and quality of life all stood upon the backs of slaves.

Because of this background, John was exposed to the brutal truths of slavery since he could understand the world around him. Is this how he came into his abolitionist views? It absolutely could be. But it is more likely that John first became serious about abolition when he was taken to Europe for his education. He attended a school in Geneva, a cosmopolitan place that was very open to new ideas. Being an abolitionist was not considered as radical there as it was in the Southern Colonies, and there was more writing on the subject of abolition, including a poem by Thomas Day, an abolitionist patriot, whom John was friends with.

So John’s serious thoughts on abolition may have partly been a product of being away from a place where slavery seen as a part of life and being in a place which was more open to abolition. John may have thought slavery wrong for a long time, but lacked adequate support to be vocal about it.

Significantly though, John did not abandon his beliefs when he returned to America. He continued to be a vocal abolitionist, and unlike his father Henry, confronted actual slave owners and tried to convince them to free their slaves… including his boss, General George Washington.

He also converted Lafayette into an ardent abolitionist, and Lafayette, even after Laurens’s death, stuck to these beliefs. He later in life even bought a plantation and ran it with the labor of paid black people, to prove it could be done.

But once we get to the war, we must also talk about Shrewsberry.

John didn’t own slaves, technically. But his father dispatched two of his slaves to serve as John’s valets during the war, one of whom was named Shrewsberry. (Something to note: I am not sure if these slaves were paid or not. I would assume not, and I have yet to find a record of payment, if it did exist. But if anyone knows more about this, I would love to know the answer, as it’s an important question to think about.)

This alone would mar John’s “perfect abolitionist” image, but it gets more disturbing when you consider how John viewed and treated his valets. I should mention we don’t have a ton of evidence of their living conditions, but what we do have is distressing.

On to the primary evidence: if you read the correspondence between John and his father, a funny/not funny pattern is that John is always requesting clothes, fabric, hair powder, etc., from his father. He usually thanked his father for these items. But here is a quote from a letter John wrote to his father on December 15th, 1777: “Berry received a hunting shirt and a check shirt. If there be any difficulty in getting him winter clothes I believe he can do without.” So while John advocated for black Americans in his public life, his private conduct tells differently.

And this is further evidenced when, after Laurens’ death in 1782, Thadeus Kosciuszco wrote to Nathaniel Greene that John’s slaves (his father's technically, as explained above) were “nacked” and that they were in need of “shirts jackets Breeches.” (“nacked” meaning “naked.”)

While John Laurens was certainly more enlightened than the average man of his time on the subject of slavery, he still had trouble connecting his broader ideas of freedom and emancipation to his personal life. He also wrongly blamed Shrewsberry for the loss of a hat, writing to his father, “Shrewsberry says his hat was violently taken from him by some soldiers as he was carrying his horses to water. If James will be so good as to send him his old laced hat by the bearer I hope he will take better care of it.” The blame for this incident obviously lies upon the soldiers who stole Shrewsberry’s hat, but John acts like Shrewsberry was in the wrong, or somehow that having the hat “violently taken” indicated that Shrewsberry was not taking care of the hat. The automatic and unjust condemnation of Shrewsberry again speaks to how John did have the prejudices of his time period in his head, even as he fought against them in a broader sense.

Later in the war, John left Washington in favor of his home state, South Carolina. He wanted to raise a regiment of slaves to fight for the patriot cause, who would then be emancipated for their service. John had written his father about the idea earlier, saying,

“I would bring about a twofold good, first I would advance those who are unjustly deprived of the Rights of Mankind to a State which would be a proper Gradation between abject Slavery and perfect Liberty—and besides I would reinforce the Defenders of Liberty with a number of gallant Soldiers—Men who have the habit of Subordination almost indelibly impress’d on them, would have one very essential qualification of Soldiers—I am persuaded that if I could obtain authority for the purpose I would have a Corps of such men trained, uniformly clad, equip’d and ready in every respect to act at the opening of the next Campaign…”

Reading through this carefully, we can see some ideas expressed here that are important to note. Firstly, “proper Gradation between abject Slavery and perfect Liberty.” This means that though John did want to free the slaves, he did not think that black people should have the “perfect Liberty” that whites enjoyed. Additionally, when John writes, “Men who have the habit of Subordination indelibly impress’d on them” he is suggesting (to my reading) that because slaves were constantly treated as inferior, they would be good soldiers (I assume because soldiers have to obey their commanding officers.) Honestly, this reads to me like John wanting to take advantage of the cruelty slaves endured because “They’re used to it.”

Henry wrote back that what John was offering was hardly better than slavery, again assuming his attittude of “my slaves are happy.”

John wrote a long letter in return, explaining his reasoning and also basically being like, “dad please support me, dad, please.” But there are also some phrases here, in his letter defending his abolitionist views, that are revealing about the prejudices John harbored. 

He writes, “I confess, indeed, that the minds of this unhappy species must be debased by a servitude, from which they can hope for no relief but death, and that every motive to action but fear, must be nearly extinguished in them.”

Note John’s reference to slaves as a “species” rather than a race. (And, by the way, race is a social construct, not an actual biological thing.) The belief that blacks and whites were separate species was common at the time, and often used by slave traders to justify their actions. And this bit of writing shows that even if John didn’t really believe this wholeheartedly, he at least had the idea in his head. However, later in the letter John does use “race” so it’s a little unclear what he actually believed.

And we can see the belief that black people were not as intellectually capable as white people, owing to their enslavement.

Gregory Massey puts it this way: “Young Laurens reasoned that blacks were not innately inferior to whites; rather, their apparent mental deficiencies resulted from generations of enslavement.”

John goes on, “I have had the pleasure of conversing with you, sometimes, upon the means of restoring [the slaves] to their rights. When can it be better done, than when their enfranchisement may be made conducive to the public good, and be modified, as not to overpower their weak minds?”

What sticks out here is, of course, the assertion that the slaves had “weak minds.”

Essentially, John thought that once black people were allowed to live free, “rescued from a state of perpetual humiliation” as he put it in the same letter, their nature would change to more like whites. Black Patriots and Loyalists: Fighting for Emancipation in the War for Independence by Alan Gilbert states, 

“Nonetheless, John Laurens retained a slave-owner’s perspective about the psychology of blacks at the time. In a 1776 letter to his father, he ignored manifold black acts of resistance and their hunger to be free: ‘There may be some inconvenience and even Danger in advancing Men suddenly from a State of Slavery while possessed of the manners and Principals incident to such a State... too suddenly to the Rights of freedman. [T]he example of Rome suffering from Swarms of bad citizens who were freedmen is a warning to us to proceed with caution.’ [...] The son insisted, however, on the principal that slavery is simply wrong, the immoral shackling of another: ‘The necessity for it is an Argument of the complete Mischief occasioned by our continued Usurpation.’”

But the same book also says, “John Laurens was a practical abolitionist. Favored by nature and fortune, he chose no easy path. He could, for instance, have worked for Washington, recruited a company of white soldiers as his father urged, and still have advocated for the “public good.” Instead, he committed himself to the nobler course of fighting determinedly for abolition.”

However, “18th century abolitionist” usually did not mean someone who believed black and white people were equal and should have the same rights. It meant that you wanted to end slavery. The difference between these views often gets blurred for John Laurens. Saying that John Laurens was an abolitionist is accurate, but he probably did not believe that black and white people should have the exact same rights, at least not at first. That needs to be acknowledged. John was an abolitionist, but it is unclear how much equality he really wanted. 

Only paying attention to his anti-slavery professional life also leads to the idea that it is safe to idolize Laurens, rather than critically examine his complex views on race. The idea forms that he is the one white man from the 18th century we can be fully proud of. The one we can say is our beautiful cinnamon roll without having to confront his relationship with slavery. The fact that John Laurens wanted to help enslaved people gain their freedom doesn’t change the ways in which he benefited from white supremacy, nor how he treated his personal servants, nor the racist ideas he expressed in some of his writings.

This does not mean Laurens was evil, or that you can’t like and admire parts of him. By the standards of other revolutionary figures, like the aforementioned Jefferson and Washington (and Madison and Hamilton to an extent*) Laurens was remarkably enlightened. But also, that in itself is terrible. Like, the idea of a “good guy” from the 18th century is still one that believed that black people had “weak minds” owing to their enslavement. 

If we truly want to reckon with the racial sins of America, and how they originated, we need to see figures like Laurens for all they were. Not just the noble abolitionist, but also the inherently privileged white man whose righteous public crusade was enabled by the very system it sought to end, slavery. We also need to see him as the extremely wealthy young man who regarded the command of his servants as part of the natural order of his life.

I didn’t write this solely for history. John’s story is a reminder to all allies that actions based on our beliefs are important to make in our private lives, as well as public. Yes, it’s important to advocate for racial justice in our public and professional lives. But it’s also important to examine and be honest about our own forms of privilege and the ways in which we have internalized the racism of the world around us. All white people in America benefit from slavery and the systems it was built upon, even those whose forebears came to America long after slavery was abolished. I firmly believe that a step forward for racial justice in the US is simply to acknowledge privilege, because we cannot fix a broken system until we realize all the ways in which it is broken. 

[realityhelixcreates]

The Mystic Garden: Sowing

Chapters: 1/5

Fandom:  Marvel Cinematic Universe

Rating: PG

Warnings: death

Characters: Loki(Marvel) 

Additional Tags:  Infinity War Doesn’t Exist, Everybody Lives, Mutants Exist In The MCU, The Reparations Of Loki Of Asgard

Summary:   Despite S.H.I.E.L.D. becoming a smaller and more selective organization, Loki still finds himself assigned to them upon Asgard's arrival on Earth. Required to perform a kind of specialized community service, Loki is paired up with another outcast, of a kind he is not familiar with: A mutant named Iris.

Loki of Asgard was a very beautiful man.

Loki of Asgard was a very powerful man.

Loki of Asgard was a very dangerous man.

And that was about all that anyone at S.H.I.E.L.D. could agree on about Loki of Asgard.

To some, he was an asshole. To others, perfectly charming. To yet more, he was polite, but distant. Funny. Serious. Sarcastic. Aloof. Morbid. Morose. Intimidating. Shy. Threatening. Angry. Flirty. Each person Iris asked described him in a different way.

To Iris, he was a looming presence, staring her down with searing intensity. Her shiny, brand new partner. Joy.

“So you're the unfortunate one.” He grumbled. “Winner of the worst lottery this organization has ever thrown.”

“I'm Iris Devereaux.” She said, holding out her hand. “Pleased to finally meet you.”

He glanced at her hand with a sneer. “No you aren't.”

“Beg pardon?”

“No one is pleased to meet me.”

“Oh. Well. Here's the thing: you don't decide that for me.”

He raised one perfect eyebrow, tilting his head back.

“I don't tolerate men telling me what I do and don't think or feel. Only I can know that. Now, you gonna shake my hand or not, Mister 'of Asgard'?”

Loki harrumphed. “As you demand, Miss 'of the Riverbank'.”

“What?” Iris took his hand and gave it a firm shake. He allowed it, but drew his hand back the instant she released it.

“Your surname. It means 'riverbank'. Didn't you know? Named after a goddess, and yet you seem to have lived humbly.”

“I'm named after a flower.” Iris corrected.

“The flower was named after the goddess.” He re-corrected. “The personification of the rainbow, a messenger of the gods. She who waters the clouds with her ocean-filled pitcher, flying on glowing, golden wings to carry the pleas of mankind to the gods they prayed to. As she connected the sea and the sky, her rainbows connected mankind to the gods. Just as our Bifrost connected Asgard to Midgard with the beauty and magnificence of the rainbow.”

“Oh, please.” Another agent groaned from their nearby work station. Loki glared.

“Well, that's...informative.” Iris said. Was this what Loki was like? Standoffish, unless given something to talk about? He was certainly well-spoken. “I'm pretty sure my parents just had the flower in mind though.”

“A delicate goddess, an ephemeral rainbow, or a nodding blossom on the riverbank: it all paints a pretty picture, does it not?” He asked.

Iris narrowed her eyes. “What are you trying to say?”

“I wonder.” Loki said.

“Will you two just go get some coffee or something?” the other agent snapped. “I've got to finish this by ten hundred.”

“Fine, jeez, keep your vest on.” Iris said. Loki glared once again. “C'mon, there's a thousand break rooms on this old boat. We can take one over for ourselves.”

   *****

“Who was that cur?” Loki demanded as Iris programmed the coffee machine for two cups. “Who does he think he is talking to? I am still a prince of Asgard, and a god! No pencil-pushing desk monkey speaks to me that way!”

“Hey, cool your chops.” Iris said, getting the mugs. “The pencil-pushing desk monkeys keep this whole show running. Who do you think runs this boat? Where does our intel come from? Who finds out if it's any good or not? Who does the budgets, communication, tech, cleanup, triage, programming, and supplies? The heroes get the fame, sure, but we're ultimately expendable. These guys own this shindig. Do you like caramel?”

“I...might?” He said, and Iris added a squirt of syrup to each steaming mug, then handed him his. “And you might be expendable, but I most certainly am not.”

“Cheers, bro. I'll drink to that.” Iris raised her mug in his direction and took a long gulp of fresh, caramel coffee. Oh boy, this was gonna be fun.

Loki seemed perplexed, either by the flavor of the coffee, or her casual acceptance of his declaration.

“Not that it will come to that.” He backtracked. “As my partner, you will have the advantage of my protection.”

“Joy. So, your highness, what's landed you here? You aren't exactly known as a friend to mankind. Why join S.H.I.E.L.D.?”

He harrumphed as Iris took another long pull from her mug. “You say 'join' as if I was given a choice. This is penance, nothing more. It was decided when Asgard had to relocate here, that I would work for a 'humanitarian' organization. Save lives equal to those whose deaths I was responsible for. Work towards paying off the cost it took to rebuild. And so I perform the Reparations of Loki of Asgard, defending this realm from itself. Once I have accomplished this, I will leave.”

“Mhm. And how far have you gotten?”

“It's only been a few months.” He huffed. “So not nearly as far as I'd like. How did they lure you in?”

Iris shrugged. “Job's a job. This one is steady, has good benefits, and it certainly keeps me engaged. It's no daily grind, that's for sure.”

“But with your power, could you not be a leader of some sort, rather than in a subservient 'expendable' position?”

“Ah. You've read my file.”

“Of course I did. As I assume you've read mine. Prying things. Why do they need so many personal details? But yes. It mentioned that you have an unusual power, beyond others of your type? Why are you not in charge?”

“Hoo boy.” Iris took a seat across from him. “You don't know much about human social structure, do you?”

Loki frowned. “It was never supposed to matter.”

“Well, it matters now. And it's mattered to me my whole life, because I can't just run off home to fairy tale land, so it looks like we both have no choice but to deal with it. You know what a mutant is?”

“I know what the word means, but I don't know how it applies to you.” Loki said, perplexed. “You look like any other human to me, so I assume it is something internal?”

Now it was Iris' turn to harrumph. “Well, you look like any other Asgardian to me, so I guess we've both got something going on under our skin, don't we? Tell you what: you explain to me what a 'frost giant' is, and I'll explain what a 'mutant' is in this context.”

“And if I refuse?” Loki sneered.

“Then I do too.” Iris said simply.

Loki stared at her across the table, the intensity of his gaze as hot as the coffee, and Iris tried her best to pretend to be unaffected by it. It wasn't that he wasn't intimidating, but an unfortunate lifetime of bigotry and constant background danger had given her a skin as thick as wood. Well, her mutation had done that as well.

“I can do this all day.” He warned.

“Alright.” Iris shrugged.

A few very awkward minutes passed, a silence spent sipping coffee, until her supervisor, Chris Timmitz, interrupted.

“Iris! Loki. There you are! I've been looking for you two. Lucky to find you in the same place, you've got a job coming up.”

“Oh yeah? Lay it on me boss.” Iris said. Loki grimaced.

“We think we've got another possible HYDRA shelter, kinda out in the open this time. We need more intel. That's where you come in.”

“It's located next to a forest, isn't it?”

“A meadow, actually.” He said a bit sheepishly. “We need you to, uh, plant some bugs on the property.”

“Ha ha.” Iris said flat-voiced.

“Aw c'mon, I didn't come up with the terminology.”

“Was that some kind of insult?” Loki asked darkly. “Do you degrade your employees?”

“Well, it wasn't meant to be.” Chris explained. “It's not my fault the language is what it is. And what about you? Iris may act tough, but she's really sweet and sensitive, so you'd better act right-”

“Or what?” Loki challenged.

“Chris. Cut it out. We don't have to be chummy, we just have to get the job done.” Iris said. “So give us the details.”

“Right, right. We're starting Tuesday. It seems to be when the fewest people are there...”

                ****

Iris crawled through the tall grass of the meadow, the plants moving naturally around her, so as to not alert her enemies that she was there. The shelter was an old schoolhouse apparently, that HYDRA agents had taken over, ostensibly to restore the historical building and turn it into a museum...all the while sheltering their agents from the law, and pushing revisionist history in an effort to spread their doctrine through yet another small town. They had done this so many times before, changing the narrative, changing the perceptions of the people.

HYDRA had many heads. It was the symbolism of the thing. Some of those heads infiltrated governments, and worked to influence world policy. Other heads overran small towns, influencing the vote, which served to make the jobs of the others easier.

Some people in S.H.I.E.L.D. likened them to a virus to be quarantined, cut out, and destroyed. Iris saw them as a sickness to be cured. Anyone could change their minds, given reason. The trick was to find the reason. That wasn't her job, and she didn't think she'd be good at it, but she knew that there were anti-radicalization support groups popping up here and there now, and no wonder, with the state of the current administration. Iris knew HYDRA must have gotten their voice very well entrenched into the government.

But Iris was more directly concerned with these little heads, with blocking their progress, slowing them down, and just generally inconveniencing them.

She'd gotten the usual stares and glares, upon entering the little town, but it was hard to tell if it was HYDRAs influence, or just typical American small town prejudice when faced with a dark-skinned stranger. Either way, she wouldn't want to live here.

She settled down in the grass, stretched out on her belly, and the sod began to part beneath her. Loki, who had simply made himself invisible with his alien magics, and crept along beside her, was clearly capable of sneaking with the best of them. He barely displaced a blade of grass. He crouched down beside her.

“We are stopping here?” He whispered. “How shall you place your devices? Will you throw them?”

“No, My aim isn't that good.” Iris said, ignoring his smug “Mine is.”, and beginning to sink into the newly exposed soil.

“Uh...Miss Devereaux...are you aware that the earth appears to be swallowing you?”

“Don't worry about it, it's fine.” She wriggled her feet out of her flimsy sandals and into the dirt. She was positioned to just be able to see the old schoolhouse over the edge of the trough that had been excavated beneath her. That was all she needed.

“Certainly. Nothing out of the ordinary here.”

“You're one to talk. Hand me the bugs.”

There were only three of them: tiny things, no larger than the creatures they were named after. Iris took them, then tore a packet of seeds open with her teeth, pouring the contents into her hands.

“This is going to take me a pretty long time. Couple of days, probably. What I'm going to need the most from you is tending. Every hour, give me something to drink. Every four hours, give me something to eat. Make sure no one sweeps through here with a lawn mower or a fire. I'm not going to be able to move, and will likely be in something of a trance. Sorry I won't be better company.”

“That's a lot of orders coming from one little human.” Loki grumbled.

“My life is in your hands.”

“That's...a bit better.”

She pressed her hand against the earth in front of her, and concentrated.

For some minutes it didn't appear to Loki that anything was happening at all. Then the first of the thin, white roots began squirming out from between her fingers, roping around her hand.

Loki stretched out in the tall grass next to her as the roots slowly formed a ragged, grasping ball of pale worms against her chestnut skin. He remained silent for hours alongside her, dutifully holding a small bottle of water to her lips every hour or so. As she had said earlier, Iris lay very still, and very trance-like, drinking without acknowledging that she even knew he was there.

“Hmmm.” He whispered. “I hate being ignored, you know. I wonder if you can even hear me? Could you explain what it is that you are doing, or are you so far away that you cannot even answer? What would happen if I touched you right now, Goddess-Flower of the Riverbank? Would I break your concentration? Would you even notice?”

He opened one of the little ration packs, half of which were specifically labeled with Iris' name. Within were little brown cubes that smelled deeply unappetizing to Loki, formed from a slurry of many mysterious ingredients.

“A special recipe, just for you? S.H.I.E.L.D. must value you more highly than you have previously stated. Here you go, Bright Blossom.” He held the little cube to Iris' lips, which parted automatically to accept the cube. “And so I have become no more than a nutrient dispensary. How far I have fallen.”

He fed her the cubes, one by one. Every brush of her petal-velvet lips against his fingers tempted him to push them into her mouth, a temptation that brought a chuckle to his own lips. There were only so many games he would be allowed to play, before S.H.I.E.L.D. kicked him out entirely. He wasn't attached to S.H.I.E.L.D., or anyone within the organization, but working for them kept him active, kept him relevant, kept him engaged, and most importantly, kept him out of prison. Community service was infuriating, but he had experienced the soul-crushing torment of solitary confinement, and this was much preferable.

A cold, uncomfortable cell? Or laying in the grass on a warm, sunny day, hand-feeding a pretty girl?

He was very tempted to lay his hand on the small of her back, where her uniform had ridden up just enough to show a strip of glistening skin, but it wouldn't have the proper punch with Iris in this deep trance. Without reaction, there was no fun.

The roots winding their way up her arms were somewhat unsettling. Was this what her file had meant when it noted that she was a 'mutant'? That she could cause plants to sprout? Could other humans do that?

Hours later, when the sun had set, and the roots had wriggled into the soil all around her, and crawled their way up to her shoulders, Iris stirred.

“Mph. Man, I'm sore.” She complained.

“Ah, welcome back. There is a powerful desire I need you to fulfill.”

“Not on company time. There's trees over there, go behind them and, uh, work it out? Also, for next time, I really don't need to know.”

“You flatter yourself, or you underestimate me. What I want, is for you to explain what you are doing. Are you making those plants grow?”

“Oh. Yeah, basically. You read my file; you know I'm a mutant.”

“Yes, but I do not know the significance of the term.” Loki admitted. “Is it this? This magic you wield?”

“It's not magic, it's just...it's genetic. I was born this way. At first it was just little things. Gardens grew better wherever I went, I didn't get hungry as much when there was sunlight, I didn't need to drink as much as long as there was water on the ground. I grew up in a way rural community tucked away in the Everglades. We were real poor, so being outside and having wet and muddy feet was just normal for all the kids.

As I got older, the signs got more obvious. I can do things that plants can do. I can direct their growth, and I sorta...change with the seasons, depending on where I am.”

“What do you mean?”

“Eh, stick around long enough and you'll see. Anyway, people aren't too fond of mutants, and it got...tough. To live at home, I mean. So I went out into the wild, and I did pretty well there, but S.H.I.E.L.D. found me and offered me something else. Not every mutant is like me. There's a lot of different ways to be a mutant, it's unpredictable. Some folks can fly, others can turn their bodies into metal, and some can heal wounds to their body in seconds. I manipulate plants, and am, in some ways, like them.”

“I see. And you are causing these plants to grow for what purpose?”

“Spying purposes. It's gonna take a few days, but these vines will tunnel through the ground, all the way up to the school house. When they break ground, I'll send one of them up that tree there, another one around the frame of that window there, and the third down the chimney. You saw those little devices? They're holding those in packets of leaves, and will position them so that they remain hidden, but they consist of audio, video, and heat signature recorders. Once I've gotten them in place, we'll leave. That's all this mission is; bugs on plants.”

“Then why am I here?” He wondered. “You seem to have this well in hand.”

“Someone's gotta feed me. And make sure I don't get found out. There's rumors you can make magic illusions. That's probably why. You can hide us both from any eyes or cameras.”

“And I have.” Loki said proudly. “And fed and...watered you, Little Blossom. What else do you need from me?”

“To do it all again tomorrow.” Iris said. Then she dropped her head into the nest of roots, and settled down to sleep.

                                                                         *****

Iris was awake and in her trance just as the first light of dawn kissed the horizon. Loki had been awake even before that, every swish of grass or crackle of leaves grabbing his attention.

“Rest.” He commanded her. “I have not the need of it that you do. Never forget: I am no weak mortal. You require a large amount of sleep, but I am all the greater.”

Iris had snorted at the bravado, but accepted the cubes he fed her, and fell into her trance, the roots curling further and further around her body.

Loki idly wondered how far the roots would go. Would they cocoon Iris entirely, prompting her to 'hatch' into a new form? Would they drag her down into the earth, entombing her away from Loki forever? Or would they just die back?

He watched people come and go to the old schoolhouse, working on its restoration. They looked for all the world like normal workers; he didn't even believe any of them to be armed. Not all HYDRA agents were combatants, after all. Just as many of them were spies, thieves, politicians, PR specialists and spin doctors.

Ever since what the other S.H.I.E.L.D. agents called 'The Big Reveal', both organizations had been frantically rebuilding. S.H.I.E.L.D. more slowly, taking only the best, only the most trustworthy. Loki supposed he should be proud, even though he knew he was only there as a glorified prisoner.

HYDRA's recruits seemed to be skyrocketing, as they took to the internet in search of easily radicalized young men-mostly men, and boys-to bolster their numbers. They found plenty of them, and quickly, but they were sloppy and unpredictable. All too often, one let their ego overcome their loyalty to the cause, an event that almost always led to public confrontation and violence. But the news media-already infiltrated, most likely-was always quick to exonerate or sympathize with a young white man.

HYDRA disgusted Loki, even back when he had 'convinced' a small cell to work with him. No one group knew what the others were doing. There was a severe lack of communication between cells. Yes, Loki supposed it kept them safe from discovery, but he found it inefficient. A waste of potential by people more invested in the pageantry of a secret society, than by the end goal they hoped to achieve.

S.H.I.E.L.D. was little better, in his opinion, but at least its people were more serious about their work. Communication was more open, their goals more achievable. It felt like they made a difference, whether they really did or not. And they didn't waste potential. HYDRA would simply kill someone like Iris, S.H.I.E.L.D. found her valuable enough to spend resources on her. Under Loki's regime, had he succeeded, Iris, and all people like her, would have been of personal interest to him. All of these so-called 'mutants' would have been given places of high honor. Loki did not waste potential.

But that wasn't worth spending more time dwelling on. It was never meant to happen in the first place. When and where he would rule was yet to be discovered, but it would not happen until he was finished with his penance.

He provided Iris with her water, barely able to see her under all the roots. It was no wonder that she could not go into the field without a partner; she could not be ready for combat, couldn't even eat on her own! If they had to run, was he just supposed to tear her from the root wrapping and toss her over his shoulder? Would disconnecting her like that cause her harm?

He would have to ask next time she woke.

A young man approached, wielding an unfamiliar device. Loki was immediately on high alert. Was that some kind of weapon? He wandered all the way up to the verge of the grasses, gazing placidly out over the meadow. This was a HYDRA agent? He was barely out of adolescence! But from what Loki remembered of his brothers youthful declarations of hatred towards the Jotunn, radicalization did indeed start young.

“Naw, I think it must have been a glitch.” He said into his lapel. “There's nothing out here, not even trails in the grass.” He paused, listening. “Naw. Maybe it was a coyote? There's plenty of wild animals that wander around out here. My bro swears he saw a puma last year. Anyway, I'm gonna trim the grass, since I'm here anyway. If you're really worried, come out and check your cameras. I ain't gonna do it for you.”

With that, the young man yanked a long string, attached to a pod on the device, causing the thing to roar to life. Its loud snarl effectively covered Loki's startled gasp, his invisible eyes wide at the noise and the fact that everything within a six inch radius of the device's head was shredded and flung in all directions.

He had to maintain the illusion. But Iris was right in the horrible things' path. It would rip right into her face.

Unacceptable.

Loki rolled over on top of her, covering her body, roots and all, with his own. He ducked his head just as the device passed by. The force was like a high speed whip, tearing at his hair. It would have lacerated his scalp, possibly to the bone, had he been human. It would have certainly injured Iris, whom he kept safely tucked under his body, protected by his armor and tough, godly flesh.

The young man made a few more passes, working his way down the edge of the meadow, leaving Loki with a stinging scalp from his impromptu haircut, eventually leaving after finishing a rough, sub-par job.

Loki kept still, concentrating on maintaining the illusion, now including fresh cut grass. He feared it had wavered under the assault he had suffered, but the young man hadn't seemed to notice. Hours passed with no movement from Loki, just watching as various people came and went, doing their jobs. Eventually they all trickled away.

The sun had grown low in the sky before Loki felt Iris stir.

“Um. Loki? What are you doing? Did something happen?” Iris asked, her voice muffled by his body.

“Pardon me.” He rolled back into the grass as Iris shook her face free of the grasping roots. “Some boy came through here with a horrible device that tore up the grasses. It was necessary to cover you.”

Iris sniffed the air. “Someone cut the grass. Geez, did he hit you? Your hair!”

“Is it bad?” He asked, then covered his vanity. “It doesn't matter. I made good on my word. Here, eat.” He held food to her mouth. It would be almost too bad when this was over. Feeding her was so easy, so satisfying, and his hair would grow back anyway. If only all missions could be this easy.

Iris ate, watching the sunset, Loki laying on his side in the grass next to her, just watching her. Roots and shredded grass decorated her body, cube after cube passing her lips.

“Miss Devereaux, how will you remove yourself from those roots? If I must tear them, will it hurt you?”

Iris shook her head. “No, the roots aren't attached to me. If we pull this off without a hitch, I'll direct them into the soil. But if we have to get out in a hurry, you can tear them; it won't hurt me.”

“That's good to know.” Loki rolled onto his back, hands behind his head. “There is much still to learn about this realm. What is this that you are eating?”

“You sure you wanna know?” She asked.

“I am suddenly less curious, now that you have said that.” He admitted. “They do smell incredibly unappealing.”

“It's fertilizer, essentially. Fish emulsion and seaweed, blood and bone meal, fermented vegetables, all mashed together. Sounds super gross, I know,” She said at his disgusted expression. “But it's really good for me. My body absorbs it so efficiently that there isn't even any waste. Like roots inside me that absorb everything.”

“Are there? Roots inside you, I mean.”

“Sometimes.” Iris said quietly. “Maybe.”

“It bothers you? I see. It removes you from humanity. Sets you apart. And yet, you think that makes you inferior, rather than the other way around?”

“I'm not better than anybody else.” Iris said.

“You think not? Is there anyone else in this world who can do what you can do? How many people have your S.H.I.E.L.D. actively recruited? They came to find you specifically, why would they do that?  Because you were completely average? You are a valued agent of a semi-clandestine organization bent on world improvement. You have been partnered to a god. You are above-average, Iris. Why is that difficult to accept?”

“Are you 'above average' in Asgard, Loki? Have you always been celebrated for it?”

“Mostly.”

“I haven't. I've been despised. I've been misunderstood. I've been coddled and hidden away by my parents in an attempt to protect me. I've been discriminated against by strangers, and teachers, and employers, and neighbors whose kids I grew up with. By those same kids.

I walked out into the wild one day, and didn't come back. I never planned on coming back, never planned on seeing another person ever again. But S.H.I.E.L.D. weren't the first to find me. There were two others. There was a man, a strange old man who could fly. He floated down from the sky, and told me that as a mutant, I was naturally superior to all other humans. He wanted me to come with him, said he was building some grand future for mutantkind, as if we were a different species.”

“Who was this man?” Loki asked, intrigued.

“No idea. I told him to leave. It wasn't long after I had left home, and I really didn't want to go back to any kind of civilization. I was kinda fantasizing about becoming some kind of cryptid, you know? The Everglades Swamp Witch, or something like that.

Then the botanists came. A whole group of them, trying to catalog Ghost Orchids. They're endangered, and people keep stealing them, and wrecking up their habitat. But I knew where they were. All two thousand of them. And I convinced them that I was in contact with all the remaining plants, so if any went missing after their expedition, I'd know, and come hunting for them.”

She grinned. “Like I said, Swamp Witch vibes. They even believed me!”

“So you cannot actually do that?” Loki asked. The stars had come out, forming unfamiliar shapes in the night sky. His eyes could pick out fainter lights than a humans could, and he admired the active beauty of this part of the universe while eating from one of the non-specialty ration packs.

“Well, I can, but not automatically. And not that far away. I have to be closer to a plant to really sense it, and I have to be trying really hard. Like, if I wanted to figure out where the nearest maple tree was, I would have to concentrate on that, and block out all the grass. But a maple has a different...I guess you could call it a signature? A different signature than grass does. A Ghost Orchid grows on trees, and is basically just a ball of roots when it's not blooming. Kinda like this-” Iris nodded at the roots tangled around her. “But way smaller. It looks like nothing, almost. They're very hard to spot. But they have that different signature than the tree they grow on, and I can follow that to where they are.”

“So you found all their plants, as if by magic.”

“Yeah, and they paid me pretty well for it, and I sent the money home to my parents, and then the botanists went home and blabbed. Next thing I know. S.H.I.E.L.D. is on my tail.”

“Because you were friendly to botanists?”

“Well...I might have also...sabotaged a development project.” Iris said sheepishly. “But it was right on the edge of the National Park, and I didn't let anybody get hurt! And I'm pretty sure it was dubiously legal anyway.”

The edges of Loki's mouth curled, even as his eyebrows lifted.

“What's this? You're 'shy and sensitive' I was told. Was I sold a bill of goods? Are you, in fact, a naughty little mutant?”

Iris rolled her eyes. “Ugh, don't joke. Naughty little mutants end up dead.”

The amusement drained from his face.

“You would be celebrated in Asgard.” He said.

“We aren't in Asgard.” She answered. “The only thing that matters is where we are now. Those guys in there? They'd kill us both just for being born. They'd make it so that no one like us could ever be born again. When S.H.I.E.L.D showed up, in their black uniforms and started introducing themselves as 'agents', I thought that's what they had come for. The government was there to kill me.

At that point, I'd been off the grid for over a year, and I didn't know anything about the S.H.I.E.L.D./HYDRA internet explosion. But when they started talking about rebuilding as a humanitarian organization, dedicated to the protection of people-marginalized people-from, like, terrorist groups and hostile aliens, I realized they weren't there to kill me or arrest me, they were just there for me.

So I didn't make them disappear, and went with them instead. I still send money home to my parents. They don't know where I am, or what I do. They don't know the true extent of my capabilities. I'm not sure I do either. The thing about being a mutant is that a lot of these powers don't get replicated exactly, so we each have to figure ourselves out. There's no training regimen or curriculum for this.”

“So all of this is self taught?” Loki asked, impressed. “I'm not even entirely self taught.”

“You were taught? This all didn't just come from being a god or whatever?”

“No, of course not. The power is there naturally, but it needs directing. Like you, I suppose. You're born with it, but need teaching to use it. I had the best teachers the universe could offer, and was exalted and encouraged. You had only yourself, and adversity. I've seen but little of you, but this seems a great feat so far.”

“A compliment?”

“An acknowledgment. It's good to know S.H.I.E.L.D. has become more discerning in its recruitment. I hear it was more than a little disastrous for them last time.”

“Like I said, I didn't find out about that until after. Though, I guess it's not all that surprising that it happened. There's a lot that can go wrong inside an organization that big, and with that much reach. There's just too much going on; there can never be enough oversight.”

“I know.” Loki said. “I used that against them when I attempted to bring down the planet. Somehow, they still didn't notice the traitors among them.”

“You worked with HYDRA?” Iris asked defensively.

“No.” Loki said. “I used them. I didn't...make many distinctions then, in my interactions with mortals.”

“Kinda seems like you still don't.” Iris pointed out. Loki took a breath and hesitated.

“Moreso than I did then.” He said slowly. “Then, you were just tools. A means to an end. Disposable. Interchangeable. There are so many of you, so it wasn't like any of your could actually be important.”

“Right up until barely six of us beat the tar out of you and blew up your entire army?”

Loki scowled. “That is a misstatement. The plan was always to lose.”

“Bull. Shit.”

“No, I'm serious. Earth was the weakest link in the Nine Realms, and it needed to be awakened. And you were. Spectacularly. Look what it's lead to. S.H.I.E.L.D. was purged, HYDRA exposed, and your world made ready for the arrival of Asgard. You've been opened to higher interactions, as a progressing member of the Realms.”

“Uh huh. That was totally the end goal, right? Inter-species altruism? That was what filled your heart while you blew people up?”

“Norns, no!” Loki snorted. “I hated every last one of you. I took a special delight in destroying that which was weaker than myself, never think I didn't. It's just...It wasn't entirely up to me.”

“What do you mean?”

“I mean...I mean that losing was an act of defiance that sparked off the strengthening defense of Midgard, which I continue to participate in. Doing small jobs for S.H.I.E.L.D., rubbing out the likes of HYDRA and A.I.M., all of this contributes to this strengthening.”

Iris regarded him suspiciously through her framework of roots.

“You sound like you're running some sinister, behind-the-scenes shadow plan.” She accused. “You wanna explain?”

Loki smiled, a wan, false thing.

“Do you want some water?” He offered instead.

Iris rolled her eyes. “You're not gonna distract me.”

“And I am not going to elaborate further. Your curiosity will have to remain unsatisfied, or supplemented by your own imagination.”

“Hmph. Why'd you even bring it up then?”

“I? I think you'll find our conversation naturally meandered in this direction. That does not mean it must come to the conclusion you desire.”

“So this is what Abby meant when she said you were a pain in the ass to talk to.” Iris grumbled.

“I was not put here to satisfy Abby.” Loki said airily. “Who is Abby?”

“She asked you on a date.” Iris said. “You don't even remember her? Harsh.”

Loki shrugged. “She sounds frightfully dull. I may have to play nice for now, but I needn't entertain every persons sordid fantasies. Do you leap through every hoop set before you? Or do you also tell unimportant people that you aren't interested in entertaining them?”

“All right, that's fair.” Iris craned her head back to look up at the stars. “Which one is Asgard? Can you see it from here?”

“You can't.” Loki said. “The star is too far away, too small. And it doesn't matter now anyway. Home is gone, and we must rebuild from scratch. But that one, right there-do you see? Another realm orbits that one, the Frozen Realm of Jotunheim. They were our enemies once, and yours, but no more. Partly because they are under 'house arrest' as it were, trapped on their own planet. My father drove them off your planet over a thousand years ago. Your world actually warmed up without their influence, at least for a little while.”

“There were aliens here a thousand years ago?” Iris asked, incredulous.

“There have been 'aliens' here for ages.” Loki said. “Visitations and experiments, and failed colonies, and raids. Your ancestors were still getting the hang of fire, and there were 'aliens' visiting your lush and beautiful world. Making plans. Then your lot discovered agriculture and metal, and ruined a lot of those plans.”

“Seems like we're good at that.”

“Yes, yes, I was defeated by mortals. I am aware. I was the first to know.” Loki grumbled.

“Wait, does that mean the aliens really did build the pyramids?” Iris wondered.

Loki snickered. “The hubris of humanity is not universally shared. You are known for several things, and your inexplicable drive for monument building is one of them. Visitors did not build your great buildings; you did. They did come to see them though, like tourists. Some of them even took artifacts back home with them. Hopefully they weren't too historically important.”

“That's so rude.” Iris said.

“And you would never have known to take offense if I hadn't told you.”

God of Mischief indeed.

“What other realms are there? Just the nine?”

“Eight now, I suppose. But no. There are many peoples out there. The Nine Realms were just those places that were somehow related to Asgard. Allies, protectorates and...penal colonies, you might call them. But all interconnected, and all at least a little dependent on the others, at least some of the time. That has come to an end. There is a very powerful spot now empty. I fear there will be a great deal of turmoil before things even themselves back out. It would be interesting to see how that all plays out, but alas, I am trapped here for now.”

“Where would you go?” Iris asked.

“Alfheim first, I think.” Loki said. “They like me there. They are much less dour than the Dverguar, less serious than the Vanir, not so boastful and bombastic as Asgardins, not vicious as Jotunn, and nowhere near as hectic and anxious as Midgardians...humans, I mean. They like jokes and pranks, and value magic...perhaps I should have been Alfar? If only I could have chosen.”

“Yeah, I think we all feel that way sometimes. But I guess even gods don't get that choice. Hey, how do gods work, anyway? I mean, I stopped believing in any all-powerful force a long time ago. About when the only answer anyone could really give me as to why God would make someone like me was that I was put here to test faith. My own, or other people's maybe. It made me sick. What kind of 'father' puts a burden like that on a little kid?”

Loki scoffed. “The first mistake that humans make is in thinking that anything can be all-powerful, all-knowing, or infallible. It is a ridiculous fantasy notion, immature and irresponsible. That kind of thinking can only lead to two things: complete disillusionment, or harm to the self or others. I am a god, because I have a singular connection to a certain aspect of the universe, as does my brother, but neither of us are any of those things. How boring, to be all-knowing! How banal, to be all-powerful. And I have known people who seemed to think they were infallible, and the amount of misery and suffering they caused is unspeakable.

No, gods were never supposed to be all that. Greater than others, yes, but omnipotent...no, that's only for people who are overcompensating I think.”

“What's that about a special connection to the universe?” Iris asked.

“The universe is ridiculously unstable. Did you know that? I believe it was a human that posited that reality destroys and remakes itself fairly often in the scheme of things, but by the nature of it, it's impossible to ever know if that's true. Because if reality is destroyed, so are you, and so, you would never know. And if reality rebuilds itself, then that is the only reality that exists, so you would never know.”

“Oh hell, I don't like that.”

“Well just don't think about it. In any case, this instability seems to be occasionally expressed through individuals of particularly resilient and long-lived species, by connecting them to certain random forces. For my brother, it is the natural occurrence of thunder and lightning, those two things being directly connected. For me, it is an expression of sophisticated behaviors. Those forces are ours to deploy and manipulate to our will, and we affect them in the world around us, even as they effect us.”

“So you're just born with it too, huh?”

“So it seems.”

Iris settled back down into her swaddling roots to sleep, leaving Loki to stare up at the stars. The grass-cutting human had mentioned cameras. Loki had shielded them from that kind of surveillance on the way in, just in case. They must be hidden somewhere out in the trees. Could Iris detect such things? Would it be worthwhile to disable any, if suspicion was already on them? Or would that merely draw even more suspicion?

Perhaps while Iris remained incapacitated, actions that might bring more enemies out should be avoided. She did not have his durable skin, after all, nor his speed or strength. But with her unusual and largely unexplained powers, he hesitated in thinking of her as weak. More like...a specialist.

He felt her stir, just as the sun was lifted into the sky, and he fed her her morning cubes. She settled into her work trance almost immediately. Perhaps she was put off by the previous nights conversation, and didn't want more of the same. Perhaps she simply wanted to finish this mission quickly. Surely she too found it boring to lay in the same spot for days.

He watched the people come and go about their work restoring the schoolhouse. How many of them were just regular workers, and how many were enemy agents? Impossible to tell by looking, especially if even the youth were involved.

The sun had not risen particularly high when he noticed a difference. The roots that wrapped Iris' body were thinning; as he watched, more and more broke away from the tangle to bury themselves in the dirt at her sides. It was like watching worms escaping danger.

Finally, Iris pulled her hands from the soil, and pushed free of the roots.

“Alright.” She said. “Bugs are in. Now it's time for us to bug out.”

In retrospect, Loki could admit that he had been too eager to leave. He simply didn't do well with long periods of inactivity. So when he walked into the trees surrounding the meadow, and found himself face to face with a shotgun-wielding hunter, he wasn't too embarrassed. No, what really made him kick himself was when the one behind them held Iris at gunpoint. How could he have let one of these yokels get behind him?

“Who the hell are you freaks?” The one in front demanded. Loki recognized him as the youth with the loud grass cutting device who had ruined his hair.

“Gaw, this one stinks!” The other one exclaimed. “Well what do ya expect? She looks like mud, of course she smells like it.”

“We were just out looking for a...private place, if you catch my drift.” Loki said smoothly, getting ready. “Nothing to get worried about. It's just such a nice day, and we couldn't help ourselves.”

“Gross.” The one behind Iris said.

“We don't want you degenerate types around here.” The one in front of Loki said. “Now hands up, freak. You're way too close.”

“To what, pray tell?” Loki said. Almost ready.

“Don't talk about it, dumbass!” The other one hissed.

“Look, let's just kill them, to be sure.” The one in front of Loki said. “World ain't gonna miss a few freaks. And then nobody knows, and we don't get in trouble.”

Loki lifted his hand in a gesture he knew humans considered to be rude. Both men fired their guns.

Neither of them saw the illusions of Loki and Iris fade away, sprawled as they were one the forest floor, bleeding from the bullet wounds they'd inflicted upon one another.

Several yards away, Loki took his hands from over Iris' ears, and approached the HYDRA recruits. One of them was still alive. Loki carefully wrapped his hand in a cloth he manifested from seemingly nowhere, and casually suffocated him.

He then led the horrified Iris back to their rented car, and got back onto the highway as quickly as he could.

The silence stretched on for several hours, Loki watching the road, Iris gazing out the window at the scenery.

“Why didn't we sneak off as soon as you put up those illusions?” She finally asked. “We were invisible. We could have just left.”

“They had seen us.” Loki said. “They could not be allowed to go and inform their superiors. If there was suspicion that we had been snooping around the school, the entire point of the mission would be moot. Besides, they were extremely rude.”

“Don't joke.” Iris said sharply. “You killed that man in cold blood.”

“I killed him on cold practicality.” Loki corrected. “He could not be allowed to live, and let others know that he and the other one hadn't actually accidentally shot one another. Once anyone had seen us, that had to be the end for them. It is understandable that you might not like that, which is why I would not ask you to participate. But if I am sent on a mission as a protector, then that is what I will do. These were men who wanted to kill you just for being born, remember?”

“They were radicalized. They could have been deradicalized.”

“And how do you propose we were to do that?”

Iris huffed. “Damnit.”

“Sometimes we aren't afforded the choices we would prefer. But don't fret. I will take full responsibility in the report. I know the Director isn't keen on too many work-related killings.” It was part of why Loki took such delight in reporting work-related killings. Just to remind them of who he was, and what he was capable of.

Once they had reached their destination and returned the rental car, Iris called their contact agent for extraction. She wasn't exactly distant, but with other things to focus on, and other people demanding their times, the closeness of the last two days was fading fast.

Oh well, Loki thought. It had been nice while it lasted. But nothing was forever, and all affection was fleeting; he knew that well enough.

But it was a little odd to see her so preoccupied with her phone.

“Have you a Tweety account, or some such?” He asked, trying to strike up a conversation once again.

“Since that doesn't exist: no.” She answered, distracted. “No, there's just...I'm seeing someone, and he wants to meet up as soon as I get back.”

Loki frowned. For some reason, he didn't like that sound of that. “You need rest, don't you?” He suggested.

“Yeah, and it's a little last minute, I admit. But he's an agent too, and our schedules don't match up very often, so we've got to meet when we can, or not at all.”

“That sounds like a difficult arrangement.”

Iris shrugged. “I'll take what I can get. At least he doesn't seem to mind the whole mutant thing. That's kinda important when you're in my shoes.”

“You do not sound entirely enamored of this man.” Loki probed.

“Well...I'd like to get to know him better, but he's very private. Mostly, I just don't want to be alone. It's hard for people like me, you know? I can't just throw a relationship away because it's not some perfect storybook romance. Gotta be more realistic than that. But I sure hope I get a few days rest before I get sent out again.”

It sounded...practical. She had to take her opportunities where she found them. It wasn't as if Loki had never been there. It was perhaps a little sad, since it sounded like she really did want that storybook romance.

Perhaps it was none of his business. It was absolutely none of his business. He followed her anyway, curious about what kind of man made this little flower bloom.

The man in question was not impressive, in Loki's opinion. Not much more than average. Maybe that didn't matter to Iris.

“Bet you're glad to be done with all that, huh?” He asked. “Dealing with that creep couldn't be easy.”

“It wasn't really all that bad, honestly. He-”

“I don't really want to hear about him. C'mon, we have the whole evening! Let's not waste it!”

Loki decided then and there that he did not like this man. Not in small part because he wanted to know what Iris had to say about him.

She took him to what must have been her apartment, and there Loki left. There were a few things he didn't want to know after all.

[douchebagbrainwaves]

IT'S CHARISMA, 372

Certainly it can be launched. That's what you're addicted to.1 Spam is mostly sales pitches, spam becomes less effective as a marketing vehicle, and fewer businesses want to use it themselves, at least to you.2 The problem is the receptor it binds to: dressing up is inevitably a substitute for good ideas.3 I'll start by telling you something you don't have to explain why. But you know the ideas are out there.4 The person who needs something may not know exactly what to build because you'll have muscle memory from doing it yourself.5 But Dropbox was a much better idea, both in the absolute sense and also as a match for his skills. For coming up with startup ideas on demand. So you have two choices about the shape of hole you start with. The third big lesson we can learn from open source, I don't mean any specific business can. Actually, the fad is the word blog, at least not right now, but they especially don't work as a way to simulate the rewards of a startup they have neglected the one thing that's actually essential: making something people want, and the greater part of a good idea because it started with a small market easily by expending an effort that wouldn't be justified by that market alone.

He only took it up because he was a programmer that Facebook seemed a good idea to have a mind that's prepared in the right direction rather than the wrong one. I've described is near zero. Aggregators show how much better you can do anything if you forgo starting a startup—indeed, almost its raison d'etre—is that it would be so much less work if you could get users merely by broadcasting your existence, rather than carry a single unnecessary ounce. Was there some kind of salesperson. Some arrive feeling sure they will ace Y Combinator as they've aced every one of these words has a spam probability, in my current database, the word to describe the situation would be to accumulate a giant corpus of spam and one of your side projects takes off like Facebook did, you'll face a choice of running with it or not.6 Stripe is one of the keys to retaining their monopoly.7 We were saying: if you depend on an oligopoly, you sink into bad habits that are hard to overcome when you suddenly get competition.

I do before x? Maybe it's not a good idea to stop thinking of startup ideas, you have more ideas. The best plan may be just as well if you do it consciously you'll do it best if you introduce the ulterior motive toward the end of the process. Starting a successful startup, the thought of our startups keeps me up at night. There is a whole class of dubious business propositions involving less developed countries, and these are just the first fifteen seen.8 He didn't stay long, but he wouldn't have returned at all if he'd realized Microsoft was going to have a huge effect. And they know the same about spam, including the headers.9 That's what was killing them. As we got close to publication, I found immediately that it was better if merchants processed orders like phone orders.

Well, math will give you more options to choose your life's work from.10 Fouls happen. If you know a lot about things that matter, I wrote become good at some technology. 84421706 same 0. 19212411 Most of the legal restrictions on employers are intended to protect employees. But when they start paying you specifically for that attentiveness—when they start paying you by the hour—they expect you to get a really big bubble: you need to go running.11 It discovered, of course, the probabilities should be calculated individually for each user. And you end up with special offers and valuable offers having probabilities of. 06080265 prices 0. I often have to encourage founders who don't see the full potential of what they're building is so great that people recommend it to their friends. I think, is to step onto an orthogonal vector.12 A startup just starting out can't expect to excavate that much volume.13

And yet have you ever seen a Google ad? 9889 and. Think about what you have to do is give them a share of it. Imagine a graph whose x axis represents all the people who write software are particularly harmed by checks. Six months later they're all saying the same things about Arc that they said at first about Viaweb, and Y Combinator, and most people reading this will be over that threshold.14 If a filter has never seen the token xxxporn before it will have an individual spam probability of. As day jobs go, it's pretty sweet.15

If the present range of productivity is 0 to 100, introducing a multiple of 10 increases the range from 0 to 1000. We assumed his logo would deter any actual customers, but it did not. Even colocating servers seemed too risky, considering how often things went wrong with them. You build something, make it available, and if you can make it happen. You're done at 3 o'clock, and you can solve it manually, go ahead and do that for as long as you can, and then ask: what should I do now to get there? When one looks over these trends, is there any overall theme?16 Good ones, anyway. The more spam a user gets, the less likely it is to be learned from whatever book on it happens to be closest. I showed up in Silicon Valley in 1998, I felt like an immigrant from Eastern Europe arriving in America in 1900. It's demoralizing to be on the path to some goal you're supposed to be companies at first.

Yes and no. The malaise you feel is the same. Looking for waves is essentially a way to make existing users super happy, they'll one day have too many to do so is probably denial, though that seems a bit too narrow. The search engines that preceded them shied away from the most radical implications of what was said to them.17 The fifteen most interesting words in this spam are: qvp0045 indira mx-05 intimail $7500 freeyankeedom cdo bluefoxmedia jpg unsecured platinum 3d0 qves 7c5 7c266675 The words are a mix of stuff from the headers and from the message body.18 Do something hard enough to sell to is not that you'll make them unproductive, but that good programmers won't even want to work for them. Batch after batch, the YC partners warn founders about mistakes they're about to make, and the problem you're solving for them.19

Notes

I realize I'm going to kill. Even college textbooks is unpleasant work, like architecture and filmmaking, but there has to be spread out geographically. Most explicitly benevolent projects don't hold themselves sufficiently accountable. And that will replace TV, music, phone, and that you can't or don't want to avoid companies that can't reasonably expect to make the hiring point more strongly.

Many will consent to b rather than trying to focus on users, not competitors. Do College English 28 1966-67, pp. Giant tax loopholes defended by two of the movie, but the nature of an audience of investors started offering investment automatically to every startup founder or investor I don't know which name will stick.

If you try to go behind the rapacious one. Put rice in rice cooker.

Something similar happens with suburbs. Perhaps the most important factor in the mid 20th century.

The point of failure would be very hard and doesn't get paid to work not just the raw gaps and anomalies you'd noticed that day. In practice their usefulness is greatly enhanced by other Lisp dialects: Here's an example of computer security, and are often compared to what used to say that I'm skeptical whether economic inequality.

Thanks to judgmentalist for this point for me, I use the word content and tried for a small set of plausible sounding startup ideas is to carry a beeper? If Congress passes the founder visa in a time. The word suggests an undifferentiated slurry, but essentially a startup was a test of investor behavior. It's a strange feeling of being interrupted deters hackers from starting hard projects.

Which is not so good. If you're doing something that doesn't seem an impossible hope.

Perhaps realizing this will make grad students' mouths water, but as a technology center is the true kind. Not in New York the center of gravity of the 1929 crash.

They shut down a few months later Google paid 1. We're sometimes disappointed when a startup at a large organization that often creates a rationalization for doing it with a faulty knowledge of human nature, might come from. That can be done at a time.

E-Mail. But we invest in a domain is for sale. University Bloomington 1868-1970. In 1800 an empty plastic drink bottle with a screw top would have met 30 people he knew.

Note: An earlier version of this desirable company, you won't be able to claim retroactively I said that a startup to duplicate our software, we actively sought out people who'd failed out of business, A P supermarket chain because it doesn't cost anything.

Ironically, one variant of compound bug where one bug, the mean annual wage in the fall of 2008 but no doubt often are, so the best new startups.

Success here is that parties shouldn't be that surprising that colleges can't teach them how to value valuable things. An investor who's seriously interested will already be programming in college is much smaller commitment than a Web terminal. Yahoo was their customer. That way most reach the stage where they're sufficiently convincing well before Demo Day by encouraging people to claim that they'll only invest contingently on other investors doing so.

I swapped them to act. I have about thirty friends whose opinions I care about.

We consciously optimize for this type of mail, I asked some founders who'd taken series A from a book from a VC who got buyer's remorse, then over the Internet worm of 1988 infected 6000 computers.

Mueller, Friedrich M. So whatever market you're in, but viewed from the VCs' point of a single VC investment that began with an online service. 2%. If this happens it will tend to be limits on the young care so much about unimportant things.

Some introductions to other knowledge. You should probably be multiple blacklists. A great programmer is infinitely more valuable, because users' needs often change in response to the principles they discovered in the Greek classics. Which helps explain why there are some good proposals too.

Ed. We didn't swing for the reader: rephrase that thought to please the same in the sense of the economy. Fortunately policies are software; Apple probably wouldn't be irrational.

I was insane—they could bring no assets with them. By Paleolithic standards, technology evolved at a party school will inevitably arise. In fact, if you did.

Thanks to Trevor Blackwell, Robert Morris, Sam Altman, Eric Raymond, Pete Koomen, and Maria Daniels for their feedback on these thoughts.

[lifewithchronicpain-original]

Long post ahead, but I need to address this so I can move on.

Over ten years ago, I was really into atheism and debating theology on an atheist forum, and became popular as their first female member and eventually rose to moderator then administrator, setting up a lot of rules that they still have up posted in my username. I always find that funny.

I felt like I had met a great group of people with leftist politics and all that. I felt special because I was basically their token female until the forum gained more popularity. And then the owner added a kudos system to rate someone’s popularity and I was given many kudos for being able to argue against religion, mostly Christianity, so well and I even met up with the owner at Dragon*con one year.

Then a thread got into the topic of sexual objectification and this spiraled into an unpleasant discussion about rape culture. The same men I thought who appreciated what I had to say just didn’t listen anymore and I was viewed as being ridiculous. One was so offended he started putting typical MRA jokes in his signature. Also the guy I met decided he was now libertarian and whole heartedly believed regulation caused the 08’ crash. :/ I remember another guy on Facebook from my local atheist group agreeing with those men when I brought it up; and then said “oh come on, I’m an atheist, you know I’m not sexist!”

I was now facing the fact that this group of people I had enjoyed spending my time with online for about two years might praise me now, but when I would tread into territory that could make men face how they treat women, I was shut down and told a woman in a mini skirt is Just like a rich man with a visible wad of $100s in his back pocket. I was quickly understanding for the first time why there aren’t more women and POC in these “new atheist” groups. They thought their lack of religion immunized them because they blamed religion for racism and sexism. Conveniently ignoring they also believe religion was created by men and thus promoting their already established views of women and other races. Funny that.

At the same time (we had a few women on board but they were avoiding that conversation) a woman joined and spoke up. They ripped into her. I had the comfy cushion of my status, she had none. She was given all the negative kudos and when I talked to her privately I found out she was also a survivor.

I was facing so many arguments I knew were wrong but couldn’t fully articulate. That’s when I discovered what rape culture, as well as the Just world theory. That’s when I changed from becoming a feminist in label to a feminist in deeds and thoughts. I learned the responses to their arguments and then I learned I also don’t want to waste another minute on these men. I posted my goodbye explaining their responses have caused a lack of trust I can never get past because they refuse to even see how their so-called reason left the room when they started dealing with sexism.

The only man who defended me was the lone Christian who for some reason liked hanging out there. There was also a trans women there, she was very happy to agree with the men’s victim blaming and I never understood that. But it also taught me you can’t expect to know someone’s full politics just because you happen to agree or disagree on the issue of god, or really on anything.

I learned that belonging to a group of people on the surface doesn’t mean we’re all lock-step in ageeememt over every issue. I learned I can’t trust anyone who treats relationships and sex as something they deserve and not something you enter with mutual respect for boundaries. I’m not denying it hurts to be rejected and people can be rejected on prejudicial biases, but it’s still a situation that requires mutual consent and you can’t force that on people by calling them bigots. Shaming a woman into having sex with you because otherwise you’ll call her out, is essentially forced consent which is rape. I can’t say it plainer than that.

My consistent insistence that a woman’s boundaries are to be respected, that our sex lives are not political statements to be commented on, and that lesbians owe no one anything has ruffled a lot of feathers.’A lot of people don’t like that. I have seen this from MRA’s to variois online factions of bisexual and trans people (And to be very clear, not all, I don’t like painting a group with one brush) acting like lesbians not sleeping with them is an act of cruelty, a prejudice that must be corrected. In other words, “how dare you not let me get off this is a violation of my civil rights! Lesbians must be so privileged for dating other lesbians!” It’s really fucked up and everywhere on this site. And no, trying to dress it up in woke language like “you should really examine why you don’t like penises” isn’t better. Rather it betrays an obsession with getting penises into lesbians. Not all trans women have one, but that’s too pesky a detail when you’re obsessed with getting dick into a lesbian. And trust me as a lesbian, this is an obsession many people have.

I am seeing the same things that played out before playing out time and again in online spaces, where there’s little cost to being an asshole. People decided an issue is pivotal to their identity or whatever, and do everything they can to “other” people who don’t agree. They use their online social capital to try to shame people. They knowingly post call outs to attack decent people they just don’t agree with. If they can’t chase someone off the platform they’ll make it hell for that person if as much as they can. And they will resort to nasty sexist slurs because to these people nothing is worse than woman with a mind of her own. I’m no longer 25, I don’t seek the approval I used to, I can deal with online anxieties by not engaging. I know to block people and turn off anon. It hurts to be targeted for sure, but ten years later people trying to slander me online is more like water to a duck. But I’m not everyone and ten years ago this kind of online drama could be a suicide inducing event. But they don’t care.

I’m gonna let you in on a secret, the majority of political disagreements are not worth burning down the house and destroying every relationship over. Not only will you have no true friends, you will never challenge your beliefs, your beliefs will stagnate and you will never grow, never learn.

People might read this and assume that because I don’t think sex with a lesbian is a civil right that I must hate trans women. I don’t, that’s not who I am. I know what it’s like to question my gender, I suffer from mild disphoria. I can’t imagine what severe dysphoria is like and I don’t presume to assume what is right for everyone suffering from this. It is terrible, and no one deserves to be treated like shit for it. But that also doesn’t give some people (I emphasize, this is not every trans person’s doing) the right to attack women for talking about sexism, their vagina, pregnancy, or being a lesbian. I couldn’t give a rats ass if a lesbian and trans women get together, I have no right to judge or police that, but it’s okay to police lesbians? That’s fucked up, and let’s not pretend the same standard is applied to gay men, because it 100% is not.

Everyone, no matter the gender, is susceptible to sexism. Calling that out is not me saying I hate trans women, or I want to fight against trans advocacy or anything like that. I just want to talk about sexism and how it affects me as a female lesbian woman. No matter how hard you try, you can’t ID your way out of sexism, just like I, as a white person, cannot ID myself out of the racial bias I was taught from birth. These things are no different to me and has no bearing on me respecting pronouns and promoting issues of trans disability on this blog.

This one issue has painted me as a TERF, when my radical feminism (which I’ve never 100% agree with, one example is bathrooms, just let people pee! When people start monitoring bathrooms I get questioned because I’m GNC) has never been about misgendering and denying the painful realities of dysphoria. I believe and trust we can better understand transmisogyny when we better understand traditional misogyny. If one gender wasn’t so overwhelmingly oppressed I can’t imagine people would have such a knee jerk hateful reaction to trans people. I might think male socialization is a thing, but unlike other people, I don’t attack trans women for our disagreement on this one point. I’ll never make a call out post because I couldn’t make a trans women say what I wanted. I will never ever call anyone a slur either, while I’ve been called a bitch and cunt.

This blog is about disability. All I care about is promoting disability justice, information, and social support. I will always be open to discussing disability as it effects any minority group: POC, female, poor, trans, gay, etc... I’m more than happy to reblog posts regarding trans disability especially with regards to HRT or surgery can effect that. This blog will never be about attacking people and trying to tear them down. I might disagree with people but I won’t try smear someone’s reputation because of it. In recent years I have striven to disagree with people without resorting to insults and assumptions. I’m not perfect but I try.

I have talked before how there are zealous aspects to all groups. You won’t have me denying that radfems can be just as nasty. I condemn any radfem who has treated anyone the way I’m being treated right now. I personally don’t believe that because one trans women did something wrong that it’s okay to misgender all trans women. I am not like that. I’m not so bitter and hateful that I can’t separate one group of assholes from a minority group.

I’ve always been about being the better person, not for the people you hate but for yourself. Holding on to all this hate and negativity, attacking women for daring to state their mind, encouraging people to attack that person, that must be aweful. I can’t, and I won’t be like that. My own mental health couldn’t take it when I did participate in some of these behaviors on my early tumblr experience. Then I realized it was tearing me apart, and that the person on the other end is a human too. I don’t have to like them, but I can respect they have feelings and a world view that wasn’t built just to attack me.

Whether or not you agree with me on a lesbian’s right to bodily autonomy, does that really warrant a response meant to tear a disabled woman down? Are the only people entitled to their own opinions the ones that agree with you?

This matter truly is about sexism whether you believe it or not. I do not actively discuss trans issues on any of my blog. I was targeted for guilt by association (because I can’t follow people I don’t 100% agree with I guess) on main and when asked I said I got nothing against trans women I do have problems with rhetoric that treats sex with a lesbian as a civil right. I was then called out. That is exactly what happened and why I had to shut down questioning and take a break.

This post is to let you all know, I’m back, I’m okay, and this blog will continue with its mission to support disabled people. If you think a disabled women like me who only ever wants to help others, deserves this, then please unfollow. I don’t care how many people follow, I care that the people who do, want to follow me. If you’re a trans woman uncertain if you can bring an issue to me, of course you can. I’m not here to judge anyone, I’m here to give whatever disability advice and support that I can.

So yeah if you can’t understand that disagreements don’t warrant tearing down a person, especially someone who is disabled and has mentioned suicide attempts, then I can’t help you and the unfollow button is right there. If you do or don’t agree with me but think it was fucked up to get called out for, welcome. This blog will return to disability issues and this is the last I’ll be addressing this issue. I’m just going to delete and block people who think calling a disabled woman a cunt is top notch activism. You will not ruin what I’ve built here. You will not cower me. This bitch has been through too much to let anonymous trolls take me down.

Much love to all those who have supported me, it has meant a lot. 💕

[arcticdementor]

Two years ago, when reviewing “The Benedict Option”, I wrote, “Almost all Dreher’s critics accuse him of crying wolf or being a Chicken Little at best … Meanwhile, I’m saying that Dreher is underestimating his enemy, painting an overly rosy picture, and not being nearly alarmist enough.”

This is still true.

“Wait, what?  Totalitarianism!  Gulags!”

I know!

Let me explain; I promise hope, this will be shorter than last time.

…

First, Dreher’s critics, while still far too blasé and insouciant about the end-game-level crisis racing straight for them, have at least started to acknowledge that something’s happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear, but that some greater degree of consternation and freak-out is now warranted.

But they are still far, far behind the power curve on this one.

As a friend of mine put it, “The single biggest problem is lag-seriousness.  We are always just at best about grim enough for yesterday’s battle.”

That is where “Dreher’s Law of Merited Impossibility” comes from.  “It will never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it.”  If it were possible, despite denials, and by pointing out a clear logical implication of progressive ideology – and even going so far as to supplement with the early appearances of those explicit proposals – to scare conservatives enough, early enough, to do whatever it takes to avoid it, then the impossible wouldn’t keep happening to them, over and over again.

But it’s almost never feasible to do this.  It turns out this is the one impossibility.  The frogs never jump out of the pot in time to avoid another scalding.  The need is not to be grim enough for yesterday, but for today, so that tomorrow won’t bring your final sunset.

That puts Dreher in the position of a Cassandra.

…

In “Live Not By Lies”, Dreher seems to assume that something like faithful Christianity as we know it today is going to go through a profoundly difficult era of persecution, but still, its adherents having prepared for it, it will persist at some level despite intense suffering until, well, ‘deliverance’.  Perhaps not in the Acts 12:3 sense, but then again, maybe so.  How else?

…

That’s why even Dreher isn’t radicalized enough yet, because he doesn’t seem to fully grapple with the gloomy prospects for his tradition that is the clear implication of his own arguments about the overwhelming magnitude of the problem.  That is: termination.  Slow and steady and (mostly) gentle evaporation under the relentless heat of the sun until the last drop of water finally evaporates and the spiritual desert goes completely dry.

It would be like Travis telling the defenders of the Alamo that Santa Anna was sending a force in the morning that outnumbered them ten to one, that supplies were nearly exhausted, and reinforcements too far away to help.  But with a tone of brutal optimism, “It’s going to be really rough boys, but if we’re tough enough, we’ll make it.” – “Um, rough?  Well Travis, come hell or high water, I’m happy to make a stand and fight by your side.  No rendirse!  But to be frank, from the way you put it, I reckon it sounds like we’re all going to die.”

…

Now, before I explain why, let me get to the second piece of good news and commend Dreher for a wonderful second half of the book, which contained the inspiring and gut-wrenching stories of what it was like for people of faith behind the Iron Curtain to be the subjects of Communist anti-Christian oppression.

As I look over my notes, I see almost no comments or criticisms in that half.  The testimonies speak for themselves.  These harrowing and moving tales of triumphs of fidelity and perseverance in the face of the hardships and miseries of hard totalitarianism don’t need any gloss.  The stories of these brave people deserve your study, and their memories your honor.

However.

What is both terrible and true is that a month later you are probably going to forget all their names, forget the details of their persecution, and come away with the same rough impression and vague understanding you already have. This is that Christians had it really bad in a place where Christianity was once all of life but had been evicted, that some of them nevertheless stayed devoted, and others gave the last full measure of devotion.  Others resisted, and some of them even lasted long enough on the road through hell to make it through to the other side.

Though, in a way, it was lucky for them there was the other side: that didn’t happen everywhere.  If the Soviets had then what the Chinese have now, likely there would have been no interviews or happy endings.  You can’t even forget a martyr’s name if you never got the chance to hear about his martyrdom in the first place.

…

Alas, this is not really a manual at all, and regardless of whether Dreher is dropping some kind of Straussian signal with that, it’s surprising that few of his critics have noticed the problem.

An actual manual is more than just general rough guidelines; it has clear, specific, step-by-step instructions for how to accomplish some identified, well-defined task or troubleshoot typical problems.  It cannot be a bunch of personal narratives, and, “Follow their lead; just be like them.  Refuse to bend, like Benda.”

If one picked up, say, a survival manual, one would expect to emerge knowing how to start a fire and build a shelter.  A beginner’s cookbook will at least tell you precisely how long to boil an egg.

What does Dreher tell us to do in an age of persecution?  “Embrace Suffering.” “Choose a Life Apart from the Crowd.”  “Reject Doublethink and Fight for Free Speech.”  “Cherish Truth-Telling but Be Prudent.”  “Cultivate Cultural Memory.” “See, Judge, Act.”

He doesn’t get much more specific.  I think he believes he got more specific – “form small cells … read other books,” and the recitation of Solzhenitsyn’s Six Hard Rules on page 18 – but it’s not actually the case.  “See, Judge, Act” is just a description of any rational decision-making process, and “Yeah, but this is Persecuted Christian decision-making,” doesn’t actually put meat on the bones.  These are mostly motivation stimulants and abstract encouragements of the right general attitudes, but those do no a ‘manual’ make.

These are like ordering the military to “Be able to fight and win wars,” and then someone else develops the *actual* doctrine and writes the field manuals.  These commandments, like the Decalogue itself, just raise a host of questions, “How much suffering?  How far apart from the crowd?  Which crowd?  How do I identify doublethink?  Fight for free speech how?  Fight for hate speech too?  Where is the line between prudence and paying so much lip-service I lose my soul?”

…

But how is some ordinary person who needs an actual manual supposed to live not by lies, if the famous, influential guy writing the admonition feels just as compelled by circumstances and prudence to live by omitting the lies?

There should have been at least one page that went like this:

You as a Christian are going to be strongly pressured to “wear the ribbon” and to say the following things which do not accord with the truths of our faith, and in order to live not by lies, you must be willing to sacrifice, suffer if necessary, and never say …

Never say what, exactly?  Yes, integrity in general is a virtue, but obviously Dreher is talking about the Big Lies.

But in his book, there is a surprising paucity of actual lies.  Isn’t that something?  First it’s strange, then it’s puzzling, and then when you solve the puzzle, demoralizing.

My take is the answer to the puzzle of absence is Dreher’s actual manual, the one you are supposed to figure out.  The most critically strategic task is to preserve precisely this kind of room for maneuver: the freedom to speak the truth and to condemn the lies.  If you still can, if there is still some crack open in the window of opportunity, then you must band together and stop your opponents from being able to impose their rival orthodoxy on you, which forces that absence and omission and uses that dominance to call your lies truth and your love hate.

If you can’t do that, if you missed your chance to make that stand, then like the Alamo, it’s only a matter of time.

…

Otherwise, without the list of lies one lacks a clear idea of the threat one faces, and so vague guidelines are all that are left and there is no possibility of a manual with precise instructions.  But with the lies, the enemy hears his own name like the aliens hear a scream in “A Quiet Place”, and then come down on you like a ton of bricks.

VI. From whence the cascade

Well, look, no sense getting some bricks in the face if one can avoid it, that’s just being smart and prudent.  Though, inconveniently, it’s Dreher himself who quotes Milosz to argue against this kind of seductive logic.

Better logic would be to say that one can reason that the intended audience probably knows the lies already, and knows that they have been weak, acquiesced, and lived by them.  They know what they are supposed to stand up for already, and they know they have failed to do so.  They know who their enemies are, and they know they have failed to resist them.  You don’t need to list the lies to send a signal to all these people that, by the very fact of this book existing, knowing that it is being digested by so many other people, they are not alone, and they can act differently.

But what the audience still doesn’t know is what to do about it.  Dreher may not know either.  Notice: a thousand Benedict Option startups have not bloomed.  The Benedict Option was criticized as crazy and alarmist, but again, the ugly, gloomy truth is that it’s actually the hopeful, optimistic, and practically wishful-thinking take on things.  Most likely, there is no such option.

…

The anti-audience already believes Dreher is far more of a kook and Chicken Little than his Christian critics do, and just a continuation of “The Paranoid Style In American Politics.” To them, Dreher can get in the back of the line behind the McCarthyists, “Eisenhower was a Commie!” John Birchers, QAnon conspiracy theorists, and low-status judgment-day-is-just-around-the-corner-all-the-signs-are-actually-happening prepper types.  They are once again proclaiming the first half of the law, “It will never happen.”

And without the list of lies, their argument wins the day.  It seems fully plausible and convincing.  It sounds like this:

Oh look at these idiots going off again.  Here we are, just trying to make sure love wins and hate loses.  Our ‘radical ideology’ amounts to “Don’t be a bigot, help your fellow man, and keep your toxic hatefulness to yourself.”  Everybody should be included, and nobody ought to be unjustly discriminated against.  Simple, self-evident, human universals, really, do real, loving Christians really disagree so much with any of those?  And because the white supremacist homophobes can’t think of anything else to say in response, the hide behind ‘Christianity’ as a pathetic rationalization for their simple irrational animus, and resort to inventing fantasies like gulags and torture rooms and KGB agents.  Like *they’re* the victims!  Delusional!  What kind of creepy psychological problems do they have to really imagine that with all their wealth, comfort, freedom, privilege, and petty first world problems, that they are remotely spiritual kin with people who endured the worst suffering possible?  Crazy!

Do you see the problem?  It’s the ‘merited’ part of the law.  Dreher wants to respond with the simple truth, “We’re not bigots, and we don’t deserve it.”  The response would be, “Ok, let’s find out.  What is it exactly that you are going to insist on believing or doing, that we would possibly think was worth throwing you into a gulag?”

He can’t beat around the bush with something general and evasive, “For being devout Christians.”

The response (at least from the rare one who knows anything about Christianity) would be as follows:

Look, we just think your religion is mostly a collection of mythological fantasies and superstitious prohibitions, but combined with a salvageable core of a worthy moral perspective that, like almost all ancient and traditional lines of philosophy, represents an incomplete and imperfect grasping toward the same ethical framework we now hold dear.  That’s why Jefferson rewrote the bible, removing all those superfluous distractions.  Following the actual bible seems kind of nutty and backward to us, but now that it’s in clear political retreat in terms of numbers and influence, and since most self-identified Christians don’t really seem to live like they take most of it seriously, we regard it as mostly harmless.  So long as you keep it to yourselves.

So, nobody is going to throw you in the gulag for going to church.  Or for believing Jesus is Lord, that he is the Savior of humanity and God’s only son, that he was born in Bethlehem of the Virgin Mary who in turn was immaculately conceived, that he performed miracles, made water into wine, multiplied bread and fishes, walked upon water, healed the sick, raised the dead, died for our sins, and was resurrected.  That he saves his people by means of their repentance and confession to sin and commanded his followers to love each other and their neighbors and their enemies, and to spread his word and the gospel of the good news of their salvation to every soul.

Seriously now, is that not Christian enough or you?  Are these not the central claims of Christianity?  Is that not enough freedom to be a Christian?

And we aren’t going to do a single thing to anyone for any of that.  Why would we even care?  Maybe if proselytizing is done obnoxiously in an imposing manner and makes people feel unsafe and not included.  But let’s face it, 99.99% of American Christians aren’t ever doing that anymore, so it’s kind of absurd to spook them, right?  Now we will insist that you not discriminate against LGBTs, and not to teach people to hate them, and yes, you will indeed get merited punishment if you persist in doing so.  But seriously, is Hate the hill you are choosing to die on?

As another friend of mine put it, “We do not want you to subtract from your faith, only to add to it.  Just don’t be a jerk and you’ll be just fine.”

One simply cannot give this line of argument anything like an adequate response without getting right into the contrasts between what one believes and what one’s opponents believe, that is, between the truth and the lies.  It’s a no-win situation.  Without naming the lies, the progressives will suspect Dreher’s audience are closeted bigots.  Naming the lies, open bigots.  C’est la guerre.

Unlike in the Soviet Union, the progressives don’t see mere belief and worship as inherently threatening, and so aren’t interested in prison and torture for merely belonging to a faith, going to church, being a priest, and so forth.  They look at ‘worship’ in “freedom of worship” in the same ’boutique’ manner that Fish explained as the way they look at culture in “multiculturalism”.  That is, by definition, non-threatening to the imperialist program of imposing progressive orthodoxy on everyone, everywhere.

In other words, Fake Religious Tolerance, and Fake Multiculturalism.  Fake, because it is precisely at the important friction points that the freedom or the multi ends.  Now, as Winnifred Sullivan explained, whether genuine religious freedom is even possible in anything like our system is an interesting question, but the point is that one can’t have any coherent discourse on the subject real or fake tolerance, without identifying those points of difference.

…

Now, the approach Dreher has taken has been to say that, of course it won’t actually be ‘hard’ torture and gulags, it will be ‘soft’ totalitarianism.  Dreher would have given his argument much more punch had he marshaled the parade of horribles of all the “never going to happen”s that are definitely going to happen, probably soon.  Without getting into the lies, he could still have collected in one place the likely sequence of escalation of oppressive state policies and mob pressures which will be brought to bear against Christian (and other) holdouts in the mopping-up operations.

They’ll penalize or dis-accredit private school, take away homeschooling, have child protective services yank your kids away if you try, mandate offensively heretical curriculum on core moral issues, kick your kids out of athletic competitions and related chances for scholarships, boycott your businesses, commercially excommunicate you as unhireable, and ineligible to use the internet or transactions system, give your kids abortions or sex hormones behind your back, take away your guns, allow the mob to walk right up to your front door and smash your windows with impunity, and if you try to defend yourself, you’ll be the one who gets arrested.

To his Christian readers, that parade of horribles will feel closer and more plausible and real, thus helping to raise their alarm to more accurate levels.  Some may reject these claims at first, but as they start coming true, one after the other, he will seem nothing less than, well, prophetic.  Cassandra was cursed, but Dreher can build a track record.

The trouble is, while all these things will happen, unlike in the Soviet system, they will never need to be ubiquitous or even common, so they can always be rhetorically dismissed as rare aberrations.  No one is going to publish a ‘study’ with some nice scatter plots showing the increase in the persecution index.  In the contemporary media environment, one hanged admiral – a pizza shop, a cake decorator, an expelled student, a heterodox professor – encourages millions of the others, to just give in and side with the strong horse, the cool horse.  You only have to hang one or two admirals a year, (only after groveling apologies of course) and soon enough, the whole Navy has surrendered, concludes that those admirals had it coming, and that they “weren’t being smart.”

…

The thing about hard totalitarianism is the fact of brutal oppression is inescapably clear to everyone.  Sure, it will be rationalized and justified, but that people know it’s there if they step out of line is half the point.  And if one is not enjoying being on the delivering end, the common human psychological instinct is to resent such domination.

‘Soft’ is totally different.  People will still have choices, but if they choose ‘wrong’ in the eyes of the elites, then they will just be seen as weirdo losers and low-status pariahs, not martyrs.  The flip-side of resenting domination is admiring, conspicuously affiliating with, and imitating the prestigious.  People – your own fellow Christians too – will look at the refusal to pinch incense for Caesar the same way they look at a hermit’s refusal of all society.  When you think about it, the hermit who could fit in if he wanted to is just persecuting himself.

…

The perception of dual loyalty would mean that you would be spied on, that your closest friends would be recruited to inform against you, and that you would hit an unacknowledged but hard glass ceiling in your career path, “Performance Assessment: A highly competent and reliable professional with unlimited leadership potential, but … does not adequately demonstrate he fully shares our values and commitment to progress.  Pass over for promotion absent a critical personnel shortage in his field.”

And of course, you would never be told: a breeding ground for paranoia and self-doubt.  Nevertheless, if you kept your head down otherwise, you could enjoy a normal life and even some measure of personal success and respect.

Sometimes, to remind people who’s boss, an ‘informant’ would be told to make up some baloney accusations and the local priest would get arrested and interrogated, maybe leaned on to make more false accusations of his colleagues.  No one would hear about him for days.  Then, usually, he was released with a stern warning to watch his back.

When he showed up again at services, what happened?  His whole congregation would weep for joy and relief, hugs and handshakes for hours, invitations and offers of support.  He would be a kind of minor hero, a kind of minor martyr, honored and dignified.  There were thousands of such events in the second half the 20th century.  That’s worthy suffering; inspiring, socially productive suffering.

XI. Live Hard

But what about someone who gets ‘canceled’ today?  Most of the time, it’s the Big Meh, no welcoming arms and no heroic status in one’s reference social group.  Without that, there is no utility in withstanding the suffering, because there is no power of example or remembrance.  Today, if you are accused of ‘hate’, things are such that most of your fellows will feel obliged to act like they believe it, dump you like a bag of dirt, and avoid you like the roof over reactor number three.

Dreher and Benda like to use the example of “High Noon”.  But try to imagine “Low Noon”, where, at the end, all the townspeople ganged up on the sheriff saying, “What the heck did you do that for, you psycho?  Those guys didn’t deserve that!  Now you’ve just gone and made trouble for the rest of us.  Get the heck out of our town, monster!”

…

To throw this into even sharper relief, and to demonstrate the absence of a true ‘manual’, instead of ‘Christianity’, imagine that one is trying to preserve and propagate some even more unpopular views that, while one believes them to be perfectly true, are deeply hated by just about everyone.  Any manual for dissidents necessarily works in general for any strain of persecuted dissent, and if it speaks to a particular kind of dissident, it is only because is it written in the language they are best able to comprehend.

Now, imagine a group of scattered people who were trying not to propagate Christianity and persevere as Christians, but as Confederates.  Some kind of secret society that saw it all coming since Calhoun and had, against all odds, continued for two centuries to the present day, who believed in the lost cause as the right cause, hereditary racial slavery, and all the rest.  What concrete advice does Dreher give that these people could use?  What advice could anyone give them?

There isn’t any.

This hypothetical makes it easy for everyone to immediately grasp, at this stage in the game, that it’s an impossible task.  The powers that be and 99% of society are fully committed and determined to thoroughly eradicating any remaining trace of those ideas and traditions.  They can do it, they will, they are, they are almost done.  Either the hypothetical Secret Confederates get nukes, or the protection of someone who has them, or (if they weren’t already extinct), their days are numbered.  That’s it, game over.

XIII.  Other Feet

The point is, the Soviet context is simply not the proper analogy for our situation.  That ideas makes it seem like the familiar image of the Romans throwing Christians to wild beasts in some arena.  But the right way to look at it is the other way around, once the Christians had won the upper hand.

The right context is something like Watts’ “The Final Pagan Generation”.

In late antiquity there were still sincere worshipers of Minerva and Apollo and Jupiter, continuing a religious tradition that went back, as it happens, about two thousand years.  And then it ended.  It’s a long story, and yes there was a fair amount of actual persecution as the shoe gradually moved to the other foot, but it wasn’t the key factor.

Gradually, there were fewer and fewer of these people, until there really was a last one.  And when he died, the faith died with him; the chain linking 100 generations was broken, and the line went completely extinct.  The last drop of water evaporated and the ground was dry.  Now, no one praises Jupiter, because their great-grandparents praised Jupiter.

…

Dreher’s “Why Communism Appealed to Russians” is, unfortunately, typical progressive mythological narrative (i.e., widely-swallowed propaganda) and mushy-headed nonsense drawing a line from “poverty and oppression” to the allure of Socialism.  The material circumstances of various populations simply do not constitute the proper explanation for how that particular idea – or any idea – spread and came to dominate.

…

If our own past is a foreign country, the past of foreign countries is too weird and alien to grasp without extensive immersion in its particular history.  We are taught to think of tsarist-era exile in Siberia as a retroactive extension of the Soviet gulags, but it wasn’t like that.  Siberia was like their Australia: a far away place you could send prisoners of all kinds with minimal supervision and the understanding that it was really hard to get back.  You might even hope they would try to take a go at making a life for themselves out there like colonists, because you needed to populate the vast, mostly unpeopled wilderness.

So “exile” at that time was mockable as a kind of Siberian summer camp.  Many of the Bolsheviks who experienced it were practically unguarded and made many successful and attempted escapes.  Stalin wrote of his enjoyment fishing with Tunguses, horseback riding, and of fornication (and procreation!) with 13 year old locals like Lidia Pereprygia.  Brutal, I tell you.

…

By page 41, Dreher admits that “Intellectuals are the Revolutionary Class,” but he might have just said ‘elites’.  Major historical events and struggles between groups are always and everywhere a phenomenon of disputes between classes of elites.

But then a few pages later he goes off course, “To be sure, neither loneliness, not social atomization, not the rise of social justice radicalism among power-holding elites – none of these and other factors discussed here meant that totalitarianism is inevitable.”

Unfortunately, when you are dealing with a replacement religion on the rise, and all the elites believe either in the latest edition of it or the version of it from ten years ago, yes it does.

…

With Chapter Three Dreher gets into Progressivism as Religion, but instead of accurate anthropology, we get the enemy’s version of the story about themselves, which is, as in all similar cases, slightly less than perfectly reliable.

…

If one looks under the hood, one sees that what leftism is mostly about is “redistribution of stuff and status.”  The political formula is a tacitly understood bargain to clients that offers, in exchange for political support, the use of state power to take from the enviable and give to those who envy.

…

Here’s another example of bad history:

The original American dream – the one held by the seventeenth century Puritan settles – was religion: to establish liberty as the condition that allowed them to worship and to service God as dictated by their consciences.

Actually, the Puritans immediately established a suffocatingly strict theocracy that did not tolerate heretics except by necessity, and in which ministers were public officials.  Nathaniel Ward’s or Winthrop’s ‘liberty’ was the liberty to be a pious Puritan, and the lack of liberty to be anything else.  If you were not a member of the church, you were officially a second-class citizen, and they would throw you out for anything.  The Puritans did not give people freedom to make choices according to their consciences about living virtuously or not, see, e.g., Platform of Church Discipline (1648).

Most of this ‘liberty’ story was retconned in the late 18th century during the establishment of the popular mythology of American History.  Once upon a time people like Rothbard thought that perhaps one day American society would come to be so confident and mature that it could replace the white lie mythology with the reality.  No such luck.  Instead we got a new religion that is just replacing it with a much more sinister and malevolent mythology.  That’s how it goes.  There is always a de facto state religion, and it will spread the myths it finds most useful.

…

Dreher does a good job in summarizing some of the claims of progressivism and “critical theory”, but he presents them as if they are to be taken at face value.

There is no such thing as objective truth, there is only power

Yes, you will hear this kind of rhetoric mindlessly parroted all the time, but it is by no means some kind of metaphysical principle consistently applied.  It is little more than an opportunistic tactical pose and a weapon to be deployed only when convenient, just like any double standard.  “Out truths are real, whereas your ‘truths’ are just useful lies you can shove down people’s throats and get them to repeat because you can intimidate and bully them into it.”  The fact that one can’t tell which side is making that statement about the other is what gives that perspective its robustness.

Progressives believe in rule by (credentialed, prestigious) experts, a rule that is legitimated by appeal to superior knowledge of objective truth.  Consider: “Reality-based community” or “Climate change is real.  The science is settled.”  None of that is compatible with the “no such thing” claim.

What about the “Myth of Progress”

It seems to flow naturally from the Myth of Progress as it has been lived out in our mass consumerist democracy, which has for generations defined progress as the liberation of human desire from limits.

No, just Christian limits.  This is an important point, and I think one that Dreher resists or finds hard to appreciate, mostly because progressives usually want mandatory toleration for everything Christianity prohibits.

But progressives are not libertines and have their own comprehensive sexual morality that is in some ways even more restrictive than that of traditional religions.  Is it not actually based on “live and let live,” “different strokes for different folks,” or the “anything goes with consenting adults” principle of volenti non fit iniuria, because in the progressive conception ‘true’ voluntariness and consent can only be valid in the absence of a whole host of pressures, undue influences, and power imbalances.  Contra Dreher, this imposes all manner of limits on human desire, as one can witness watching any tribunal of sex bureaucrats on any American college campus.

…

XX.  Woke Capitalism

At the same time, Big Business has moved steadily leftward on social issues.  Standard business practice long required staying out of controversial issues on the grounds that taking sides in the culture war would be bad for business” – now not taking sides is bad for business. … A powerful coalition of corporate leaders … threatened economic retaliation against [Indiana] if it did not reverse course.

Somehow I missed the reporting about all the progressives who screamed in outrage at this corporate interference in our democracy.

Still, the reason they were able to make these threats is pretty obvious: no one was credibly threatening back.  In a ‘manual’, Dreher would tell his readers what to do about this, but he presents it as a fait accompli and new normal Borg against which all resistance is futile.

…

The real issue is the surveillance, and the power of modern capabilities.  Without going full ‘technological determinism’, my impression is that the reality of software eating the world coupled with the constant tracking and surveillance by all entities with the wherewithal and reach is inevitable and unavoidable.  It is in the basic nature of technological change that once the capability is there, Pandora’s Box cannot remain shut for long.  We are already well past the tipping point on that one.

Yes, all the big institutions constantly spying on everything you do for the rest of time is very creepy and disturbing.  But if one is worried not so much about privacy in general but about persecution in particular, then from a more abstract perspective, there is really no reason to implicate ‘capitalism’ except as yet another mechanism by which powerful social coalitions can apply extralegal coercive pressure while circumventing the rules limiting direct state action.

If the state tolerates this, it is allowing an effectively collateral state to fill the power vacuum by abandoning the field of certain sovereign prerogatives.  This is the real “parallel polis”, much like the mafia is a parallel government on its own turf when the official state is unable or unwilling to take it on.  If the state does not protect its claim to a monopoly on all coercion, hard or soft, then someone else is going to pick up the coercion left lying around.

Then again, sometimes the state wants it that way.  If the mayor needs an inconvenient opponent to disappear, he probably can’t ask his chief of police to get it done for him.  But if he tolerates a Don, he can go to the Don.  If the state is not technically allowed to persecute you directly, if it tolerates some persecutors, it can have them do the persecuting.  In either case, when you pierce the veil, the rectified name for it is conspiracy.  The tragedy is that the veil has countless defenders who will insist that if it didn’t come from behind the veil, no harm no foul.

…

Two decades ago, when we started to become aware of this problem, people guessed that a combination of (1) new cultural adaptations to avoid these hazards, (2) new generations being raised from birth to be familiar with the risks of the internet, and (3) an increasingly long track record of lots of people having their lives publicly ruined, would encourage people to “adjust trim” and be much more cautious and prudent.  

Some people did just that, but, in general, it hasn’t turned out that way.  It seems that psychological effect of the way we interface online – when it seems as if it’s just you and your screen in your own little virtual secret world – makes people feel too “alone and private” to keep their guard up.  Unfortunately, if one assumes this isn’t going to get better any time soon, then one can only conclude that in a time of Christian persecution, ordinary people are going to slip up sooner or later if they touch networked devices at all, and if they refuse to do so, they will out themselves all the same.  Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

What that means is that there is no longer any possibility whatsoever of evading the notice of powerful people who are out to get you.  From the perspective of any serious, capable, and determined state (cough, China) this is now a solved problem.  There can be no secret meetings or clandestine samizdat printing operations or anything like that.  Near the end of the book, Dreher advises, “Christians should educate themselves about the mechanics of running underground cells and networks while they are still free to do so.”  As the Uyghurs would tell you, if they could, that ship has already sailed.  The old mechanics are obsolete and no longer work, and there are no new mechanics.

…

Hard cases make bad law, but there is nothing but a hard choice to make about this undeniable situation.  Either one embraces the principle of “they are private companies so they are free to do whatever they like and the state has nothing to do with it,” and accept, well, ‘extinction’.  Or one says no, undermines the principles of free enterprise and private property, but creates a terrible state power that, eventually, can and will be used by ones enemies too.

On the other hand, all the undermining and regulation has already been done in every other possible way in every other industry and sector, especially all those rules insisting on equal treatment.  Frankly, it’s bizarre to watch advocates insist on straining out the gnat of just this one thing that apparently crosses the line though it threatens half the country with political neutralization, when they are unable to summon up ten percent as much passion for having swallowed as many camels as there are pages in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Speech Is Special.  You can’t argue to get it back once it’s gone.  There can be genuinely free platform companies, or universally safe platform companies, but if companies are only free to the extent it is safe for our enemies to use the platforms to crush us, then crushed we will be.

…

“The essence of modernity is to deny that there are any transcendent stories, structures, habits, or beliefs to which individuals must submit and that should bind our conduct”

He says ‘modernity’ but my impression is that he means modern, secular, leftist progressivism.  But if you are not a progressive, ask yourself, do they seem like they aren’t interested in making you submit and binding your conduct?  Do they lack for stories with unfalsifiable elements that explain why they are entitled to do this?

The progressives imagine that they’ve solved for objective morality.  There is no “dictatorship of relativism.”  The Jacobins are not libertarians “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”  They have a perfectly well-defined concept, and it applies to you too, without any right to define a different one, because error has no rights.

XXV.  Velvet Samizdat:

Perhaps nothing helps to highlight the contrast between Soviet-era or North Korean-style Communist oppression and the current circumstances in America than the irrelevance of ‘samizdat’.  Yes, there is certainly a fair bit of purging and memory-holing, removal of items from curriculum as well as chilling, suppression, and intimidation out there for present-day writers and publishers who wish to go off-narrative.

But all of it has a mostly prospective, deterrent character.  The robust strength of the current system of opinion management is perhaps in no way better demonstrated than by the fact that there is mostly no problem with actual eliminative censorship of the past, with preserving cultural memory, archives, records, and so forth.   Because none of that makes any difference.

All the old books are still out there, accessible to anyone, instantaneously, in their own language, and free, and one doesn’t have to go back very far before most of them have the “currently regarded as problematic” volume knob pegged to eleven.  Don’t even get me started on Greek philosophy!  But almost nobody cares, and it goes unread, and even more unread than one would figure correcting for our increasingly post-literate society.  The ‘soft’ system is so much stronger than the ‘hard’, it is nigh invulnerably, such that brazen, obvious, and easily-disproven falsehoods can be printed without any concern on the part of the authors or publishers whatsoever, who know they’ll win prizes anyway.  

The counterarguments will be allowed to exist, just not allowed to make a difference.  They will never get any attention, buzz, or amplification from prestigious, cool people, and so can be ignored just as if they had been censored.  This is deeply demotivating; why even bother?  In a way, it’s actually better when your enemies know you’re lying and know you can get away with it.  Show’s everyone who’s boss.  No need for samizdat, no point.

…

Dreher is particularly inspired by the Bendas and their commitment to turning their home into a sanctuary, place of refuge, and the ‘parallel polis’ of an alternative community.

But Vaclav Benda had advantages.  The Communist takeover of his country was recent and had been widely predicted.  That meant there was still a large population of people who had grown up in the old days and were formed by that previous order to be loyal to pre-existing commitments, traditions, habits, institutions, and, most importantly, to each other.  That includes Benda himself.  His activities depended on being able to rely on the remnants of that inheritance, along with the nationalistic perception of a brutally oppressive *foreign* occupation.

But pressure and time wears down all things, and another generation or two of persecution, combined with the psychological enervation from a fully indigenous phenomenon such as that in America, and it would have been impossible.

Benda also lived in a time and place where physical proximity was essential and common.  Today it is like herding cats to bring people together, and so the internet is now where all the “private home” discussions are had.  There are plenty of virtual Bendas and little digital salons out there.  They are a great source of consolation and solidarity for dissidents, and the quality of gallows humor is top notch.  But mostly these venues have proven to be impotent and incompetent for any other purpose.  Probably the last old pagans gathered around to drink and talk about their plight, and to joke and complain about those darn Christians as they tried to figure out if there was anything else to be done.  There wasn’t.

XXVII: Man and SuperBenda

If one doesn’t have a manual, perhaps one can imitate a model.  But can the Bendas be models?  A model provides an example that an ordinary person can feasibly replicate.  But the Bendas put the extra in extraordinary.  Inspiring cases of astonishing and, frankly, naturally elite people with incredibly strength of will who are one out of ten thousand are wonderful to hear.  But if that’s what it takes, then any project which relies on typical people following in their footsteps is altogether hopeless.  Consider:

The Benda family model requires parents to exercise discernment.  For example, the Bendas didn’t ops out of popular culture but rather chose intelligently which parts of it they wanted their children to absorb.

I am somewhat less than perfectly confident in the capacity of most ordinary Christians to exercise anything approaching this level of judicious discernment, including the abilities to both choose wisely and intelligently and also to maintain the strict discipline and constant overwatch needed to keep it going, day in, day out.  “Be Like Benda” is a tall order, and if we’re being honest, too tall for too many.

This is a different context from the one in which one would encourage sinners to try to live more like saints, or to imitate the lives of the holy family, as every little step in that direction is an improvement.  As it is in horseshoes and hand-grenades, so it is in holiness: getting closer counts.

But when it comes to resisting overwhelming social pressures, one has to clear tall hurdles, and if one can’t, one cannot move forward.  Imagine you are in the ocean near the beach and someone spots a man-eating shark.  Michael Phelps is there and can out-swim the shark to shore, because he is an extraordinary man.  We all admire his prowess and we can try to imitate what he does, but in our cases it won’t be enough.  Phelps is going to make it, but we will be shark food.

…

Near the end of the book, Dreher writes, “The culture war is largely over— and we lost.  The Grand March is, for the time being, a victory parade.” Dreher has repeated this over many years, and I have been reading a similar lines for two decades at least, and it probably goes back long before that.  In a way it’s true, and, depending how you define terms, it’s been true before any of us were born.  But in a way it’s not true, because there is a great deal of ruin in a culture.  As much as has already been taken, there remains so much more territory left to conquer, and it’s odd to say one has lost a war when the battles never end and new fronts keep opening up all the time.

It’s more precise to say that if non-progressives keep doing what they are doing now, following the conventional rules of the game, then like the Pagan, what they are giving up is the capacity to hold ground.  That means the best they can do is slow down the advance and retreat and retreat and retreat until, one day, they are on the beach, backs against the ocean.

The real trouble with “Live Not By Lies” is that the encouragement of the stories (which are inspiring) and the instructions of the manual (such as they are), are simply not remotely adequate to arrest the trend of the progressive progression, which ends in The End.

The good news is that it doesn’t have to end like that, and it is still not too late to choose a different destiny. The bad news is that it would require measures far more radical than 99.99% of Christians and other non-progressives are currently prepared to accept.  The proper task of a prophet is to expand that acceptance by making them understand they don’t have any better options.   At least, not if they don’t want to end up like the Pagans.

[hollowedsammy]

Hello, hello, everyone! My name is Susie, I am 21-soon-to-be-22, I live in the EST timezone, and this is the first of my two characters, Sam! If you’d like to plot, like this or IM me! This contains his basic info, backstory, info about what he’s currently up to, some misc. information, a small playlist, tropes that apply to him, and wanted connections. Yeah... I went a little hard.

☾  ↪  cillian murphy, male, forty, he/him.  ／  ❛  have you heard from samuel marx lately ？ yeah, the forty year old mechanic / drug dealer. pretty sure they’ve been here twenty years, and from what i’ve heard, sam can be kind of cynical  &  self-serving, but i caught them on a good day once, and they were pretty funny & clever. i’m probably overthinking it, but given all the crazy shit around here, i hope they’re okay. maybe they’re watching their favorite scary movie, i heard it’s child’s play.

trigger warnings: homophobia, parental/domestic abuse, self-harm, depression

BASIC INFORMATION

Full name: Samuel Joseph Marx

Nickname(s): Sam (everyone), Sammy (his mother, close friends, or significant others only)

Age: 40

Gender: male

Sexual orientation: bisexual

Birthday: January 12, 1956

Zodiac: Capricorn

Hogwarts House: Ravenclaw

Personality type: ISFJ

Family: Joseph Marx (father, deceased), Serafine Marx (mother, deceased)

Criminal record: shoplifting (3 counts), underage drinking (2 counts), auto theft (1 count), fraud (2 counts), possession with the intent to distribute (2 counts)

TROPES

Beware the Quiet Ones

Cornered Rattlesnake

The Cynic

Deadpan Snarker

Don’t You Dare Pity Me!

Even Bad Men Love Their Mamas

I Just Want to be Loved

I Need a Freaking Drink

Lower-Class Lout

Not Good With People

Perpetual Frowner

The Runaway

Smarter Than You Look

The Snark Knight

Sour Outside, Sad Inside

When He Smiles

FIVE-SONG PLAYLIST

“The Mute” by Radical Face

“Ain’t No Rest for the Wicked” by Cage the Elephant

“Run Boy Run” by Woodkid

“The Kids Aren’t Alright” by Fall Out Boy

“Emperor’s New Clothes” by Panic! at the Disco

BACKGROUND

Sam was born and raised in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. He had a small family -- just him, and his parents. His father was a police officer, and his mother was a housewife.

Sam never got along with his father. Never. He can’t remember a single time that he didn’t entirely despise the man.

Joseph Marx was a corrupt cop, as well as an abusive husband and father. The Marx household was frequently filled with the sounds of slamming doors, screamed profanity, and glass breaking. While he frequently took his anger out on his wife, Sam quickly became Joseph’s favorite target.

Sam was also a favored target of other kids. An incident during which two older boys held him under the water instilled an unshakable case of hydrophobia in him, and he was often beat up when teachers weren’t around. Many said he brought it on himself -- what did he expect, when he was so obviously queer, dressed in such ratty clothes, acted so strangely?

Unsurprisingly, he developed delinquent behavior early on, and was frequently in trouble for cheating on tests, stealing other students’ possessions, skipping class, smoking, drinking, and stealing cars for joyrides.

Bullied at school and abused at home, Sam had few friends, and spent as much time as possible out of the house. He’d wander the swamps and streets alone, only occasionally having a companion with him.

Finally, when he was sixteen, Sam hit a breaking point. A terrible fight with his father led to Sam being thrown into the kitchen window. The glass shattered, cutting into Sam’s skin. His mother tried to help him get cleaned up, but Sam had had enough. That very night, he packed a small bag and snuck out the back door. He stole a truck from one of his neighbors, and hit the road, never to return to Baton Rouge.

Lacking any sort of plan, Sam wandered from town to town, making money via odd jobs, shoplifting, pickpocketing, purse-snatching, and selling dime bags of weed. He had his fair share of scrapes with the law -- even spending six months in a correctional facility when he was eighteen -- but always managed to worm his way out any long-term consequences. 

While in jail, Sam finally wrote to his mother -- now that he was eighteen, he couldn’t be forced to return to his family’s home, so he could assure her that he was alive. While he kept in contact with his mother from then on, Sam never spoke to his father again, and refused to ever return to Baton Rouge, even after his father was shot and killed in the line of duty.

ARRIVAL IN HOLLOWAY

Sam got to Holloway at the age of twenty. He only intended to stay for a couple weeks, long enough to make enough money to make a cross-country trip. The girl he was dating at the time went to school in Maine, and he wanted to go visit her.

When the first Hollow Man murder happened, a couple weeks after Sam’s arrival, he was nervous. When it became evident that there was a serial killer in Holloway, he started thinking maybe he should just say “fuck the money” and skip town altogether. However, before he could, the police were asking to talk to him.

It had been discovered that a couple of the deceased had bought drugs off of Sam a few times. While they hadn’t thought much about Sam at first, this caused the cops to look closer at him. Upon further digging, the investigators found that Sam was a drifter who had dropped out of school and run away from home, had a history of behavior issues, an ever-growing rap sheet, a brief stint in jail to his name, a skittish and antisocial air about him, and an obvious hatred of cops.

Yeah. It did not look good.

Sam was interrogated many times. His story never changed. He did sell weed to two of the deceased. No, he didn’t hurt them. He never even interacted with them beyond the sales. He was asleep at the time of the murders. No, no one can confirm that, he was alone. No, he doesn’t have a hotel room, he’s been sleeping in his truck.

Despite a lack of solid evidence or a motive, Sam was still a prime suspect for the first few murders, and he was told not to leave town. Knowing it’d look much worse if he ran, Sam decided to get a job -- partially because he was stuck in Halloway for the foreseeable future, and partially because he knew he might have to hire a lawyer soon. He eventually persuaded the local auto shop to hire him as a mechanic. (Accused of murder or not, Sam is damn good with cars.)

No official charges were ever brought, and eventually, another murder took place while Sam had a clear alibi, having been drinking in a local bar in full view of at least a dozen people all night. He got busted for having a fake ID, but at least he wasn’t an official murder suspect anymore.

Key word being official. Some suspected that Sam had an accomplice, and that the whole thing was a set-up to clear his name. Despite rumors, whispers, stares, and even a few people accusing him of the crime to his face, he always maintained that he never hurt anybody.

After being cleared, Sam intended to get out of town as soon as he could. But then, the girlfriend in Maine he’d been planning to go see dumped him... via postcard. It was the cherry on top of what had been a shitty few weeks.

Sam decided to stay for a little while until he figured out where to go next. He was rather enjoying having a steady paycheck for once, and it wasn’t like he had a plan. “A little while” eventually turned to twenty years.

NOWADAYS

Sam has now lived in a half-double in town for many, many years. It’s small, but he makes it work.

While most have probably abandoned the idea that Sam killed anybody, he’s still not exactly Mr. Popular in town. He’s known to be a sarcastic, self-centered dick, who has no respect for authority. (Some things never change.)

He still works at the auto shop. The original owner’s son runs it now, but Sam is the longest-standing employee, as well as the best mechanic.

Sam still hates cops. If he could refuse service to them, he would.

He’s still selling weed on the side (his boss looks the other way -- so long as Sam doesn’t get busted while at work, he doesn’t really care), and can be bribed into purchasing alcohol for underage students. However, he refuses to get mixed up in anything harder than that.

He mostly keeps to himself, and isn’t known to be particularly violent. If someone else attacks him, he’ll defend himself, but he rarely throws the first punch.

He’s been in an even more melancholy mood than normal lately, because his mother died last month.

He honestly thought the Hollow Man business was behind him. But now that a new victim has been found, he can feel people looking at him sideways again.

And, no matter how much he says he doesn’t care what other people think... he doesn’t like it at all.

MISC.

Sam’s sexuality is not public knowledge. He’s not ashamed of it, but he also wants to avoid harassment, so he’s only ever openly dated women. The only people who know are men he’s been with in the past, and maybe, maybe a very close friend.

Despite his dislike of people, Sam is quite fond of animals, and even adopted a stray cat he found a couple years ago. He’s named him Hecate, and he is quite possibly the ugliest cat in existence -- he has one eye, crooked fangs, and scratches everything that isn’t Sam.

Sam suffers clinical depression, but is in denial about how serious it actually is. It’s driven him to make some pretty damaging decisions, and he’s had a habit of burning himself with cigarettes since high school. The scars are all over his shoulders, arms, and stomach. 

Sam was -- and still is -- a frequent target of classism. Due to his lack of education and working-class background, many assume the worst in him, and many underestimate his intelligence. While he uses it to his advantage, he is irked by it.

It surprises people to learn that Sam is actually very well-read, and a talented actor. In another life, he could’ve joined a Shakespeare company. In this one, he reads passages aloud to himself when he’s alone.

Sam claims to hate... well, everyone, but he holds a special contempt for bullies and abusers. One of the only times Sam’s been known to instigate a fight is when he got sick of listening to a drunk guy catcall a woman walking by, and just decked him.

Sam still hates water, and refuses to go swimming -- on the rare occasions he has to go near the water, he won’t put his head under.

Sam has a pitch-black sense of humor. The Hollow Man murders are one of the few things he won’t joke about.

SUGGESTED CONNECTIONS

Someone who still believes Sam was or is the Hollow Man.

Related to the above, some of the younger characters have probably been told by their parents to stay away from Sam. Whether or not they listened is up to you.

Friend with benefits.

Exes.

Someone who has become aware of Sam’s depression and is trying to help him -- whether he likes it or not.

Unrequited crush (from either party).

And anything else you can think of!

[forsetti]

On Defending Misogyny: Ross Douthat Edition

Ross Douthat’s latest nonsense in the New York Times is quite the pile of crap, even when compared to other piles of crap written by Douthat.  Here is my take on the article (Douthat’s article in bold.) One lesson to be drawn from recent Western history might be this: Sometimes the extremists and radicals and weirdos see the world more clearly than the respectable and moderate and sane. All kinds of phenomena, starting as far back as the Iraq War and the crisis of the euro but accelerating in the age of populism, have made more sense in the light of analysis by reactionaries and radicals than as portrayed in the organs of establishment opinion. Not one single person with an ounce of credibility thinks that extremists and radicals and weirdos see the world clearly because SEEING THE WORLD CLEARLY IS ANTITHETICAL TO BEING AN EXTREMISTS, RADICAL, OR WEIRDO.  The ONLY way Douthat's statement makes any sense is if he thinks people with enough common sense to know invading Iraq on bogus reasons with zero plan on what to do after the initial invasion was a fucking horrible idea, were extremist, radical, weirdo.

This is part of why there’s been so much recent agitation over universities and op-ed pages and other forums for debate. There’s a general understanding that the ideological mainstream isn’t adequate to the moment, but nobody can decide whether that means we need purges or pluralism, a spirit of curiosity and conversation or a furious war against whichever side you think is evil.

For those more curious than martial, one useful path through this thicket is to look at areas where extremists and eccentrics from very different worlds are talking about the same subject. Such overlap is no guarantee of wisdom, but it’s often a sign that there’s something interesting going on.

A classic Douthat move-lay out a completely bogus claim right out of the block and then construct a whole argument on top of it.

Which brings me to the sex robots. People having opinions about the Iraq war and the European Union logically leads us to sex robots because of course it fucking does.

Well, actually, first it brings me to the case of Robin Hanson, a George Mason economist, libertarian and noted brilliant weirdo. Commenting on the recent terrorist violence in Toronto, in which a self-identified “incel” — that is, involuntary celibate — man sought retribution against women and society for denying him the fornication he felt that he deserved, Hanson offered this provocation: If we are concerned about the just distribution of property and money, why do we assume that the desire for some sort of sexual redistribution is inherently ridiculous?

If you use “libertarian,” you don't get to follow it up with “brilliant.” Never....fucking ever.  As crazy as that juxtaposition of terms is the casual acceptance by Douthat of what “incel” means is even more disturbing.  The idea that women in society have to have sex with men is repulsive on every level.  That someone gives voice to this notion and give it its own term is fucked up beyond reason. Sorry men, women are not here for you to have sex with.  Here's a thought, if men want to have sex with women, then maybe, just maybe, they should behave in ways that women deem appropriate enough to where they will give up their bodies willingly to them.  Anything short of this is misogyny at the least and rape a the most. After all, he wrote, “one might plausibly argue that those with much less access to sex suffer to a similar degree as those with low income, and might similarly hope to gain from organizing around this identity, to lobby for redistribution along this axis and to at least implicitly threaten violence if their demands are not met.” Let me de-fuckify this statement because it is a Ceasar's Word Salad of nonsense.  “Men who don't get as much sex as they want, think they deserve, need to band together to find ways, even through violence, to get women to fuck them against their wills.”

This argument was not well received by people closer to the mainstream than Professor Hanson, to put it mildly. A representative response from Slate’s Jordan Weissmann, “Is Robin Hanson the Creepiest Economist in America?”, cited the post along with some previous creepy forays to dismiss Hanson as a misogynist weirdo not that far removed from the franker misogyny of toxic online males.

I can't understand why the “mainstream” would find the unionization of violent, horny men hell-bent on making women their sexual subjects offensive.  But, see what Douthat has done.  He has already constructed his argument where the mainstream is the ones who don't “see the world clearly.”  Since the mainstream has been pigeon-holed as not seeing reality for what it really is, then it logically follows for Douthat that their view cannot be correct.

But Hanson’s post made me immediately think of a recent essay in The London Review of Books by Amia Srinivasan, “Does Anyone Have the Right To Sex?” Srinivasan, an Oxford philosophy professor, covered similar ground (starting with an earlier “incel” killer) but expanded the argument well beyond the realm of male chauvinists to consider groups with whom The London Review’s left-leaning and feminist readers would have more natural sympathy — the overweight and disabled, minority groups treated as unattractive by the majority, trans women unable to find partners and other victims, in her narrative, of a society that still makes us prisoners of patriarchal and also racist-sexist-homophobic rules of sexual desire.

There is a lot to unpack here.  First, Douthat uses a philosopher, in order to bolster the credibility of his argument.  As someone with two degrees in philosophy, I can tell you that there are a lot of batshit crazy people with philosophy degrees who throw out outlandish arguments for no other reason than to be controversial and get their shit published in order to placate the Publish or Perish Gods. Second, having sympathy for how a culture views and treats groups outside the accepted norms like “overweight,” “trans,” “disabled,”... who have a difficult time having sex for a host of reasons is, to quote Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction, “...ain't the same fucking ballpark. It ain't the same league. It ain't even the same fucking sport.” Third, Douthat, a devout Catholic who has carried water for the patriarchy, for misogynists, for homophobes...for years now doesn't get to pretend he is worried about the very structure he helped build.

Srinivasan ultimately answered her title question in the negative: “There is no entitlement to sex, and everyone is entitled to want what they want.” But her negative answer was a qualified one. While “no one has a right to be desired,” at the same time “who is desired and who isn’t is a political question,” which left-wing and feminist politics might help society answer differently someday. This wouldn’t instantiate a formal right to sex, exactly, but if the new order worked as its revolutionary architects intended, sex would be more justly distributed than it is today.

Not only did Douthat use a philosopher to bolster his argument, he completely misused their words in order to do so.  Notice how he uses Srinivasan's comment, “who is desired and who isn't is a political question,” and dovetails his own comment “which left-wing and feminist politics might help society answer differently someday,” as if they were one and the same statement.  Every culture has their own ideas of what is/isn't sexually desirable.  It has nothing to do with “left-wing” or “feminist” politics.  Some cultures sexually value heavier companions, those with smaller feet, those with longer necks, those with fairer skin...  We can argue the rationality of all of these but none of them are based on leftist or feminist beliefs.  In fact, left-leaning and feminists would argue the fuck against these arbitrary sexual values.

A number of the critics I saw engaging with Srinivasan’s essay tended to respond the way a normal center-left writer like Weissmann engaged with Hanson’s thought experiment — by commenting on its weirdness or ideological extremity rather than engaging fully with its substance. But to me, reading Hanson and Srinivasan together offers a good case study in how intellectual eccentrics — like socialists and populists in politics — can surface issues and problems that lurk beneath the surface of more mainstream debates.

By this I mean that as offensive or utopian the redistribution of sex might sound, the idea is entirely responsive to the logic of late-modern sexual life, and its pursuit would be entirely characteristic of a recurring pattern in liberal societies.

Shorter Douthat: “Smart people reacting honestly to the arguments of a libertarian nut job don't know what the fuck they are doing but I, a dyed-in-the-wool social conservative does because of some magical reason that is never explained.”  If you think placating angry, resentful, horny men is the way to utopia, I'm pretty sure you are either stupid as fuck and/or just about the most intellectually dishonest person I've ever read.

First, because like other forms of neoliberal deregulation the sexual revolution created new winners and losers, new hierarchies to replace the old ones, privileging the beautiful and rich and socially adept in new ways and relegating others to new forms of loneliness and frustration. Douthat's use of “neoliberal” was done on purpose and as meaningless as the term itself.  What Douthat really means by this statement is, “In the past, men could do whatever the fuck they wanted to women, whenever they wanted and women had to take it because that is the fucking way it was.  Now men can't do this and they are having a sad about it so we need to blame the women and those who support them instead of the fuck wad misogynists who were morally wrong 50, 100, 200... years ago for their behaviors.”

Second, because in this new landscape, and amid other economic and technological transformations, the sexes seem to be struggling generally to relate to one another, with social and political chasms opening between them and not only marriage and family but also sexual activity itself in recent decline.

“The sexes seem to be struggling generally to relate to one another, with social and political chasms opening up between them.”  Holy Both-Fucking-Siderism!  NO!!!  The “sexes” are not having a problem.  MEN caught up in an archaic belief system are having a problem-a big fucking problem.  Douthat doesn't get to lay the responsibility and consequences of men not adapting to women's rights on the doorstep of women.

Third, because the culture’s dominant message about sex is still essentially Hefnerian, despite certain revisions attempted by feminists since the heyday of the Playboy philosophy — a message that frequency and variety in sexual experience is as close to a summum bonum as the human condition has to offer, that the greatest possible diversity in sexual desires and tastes and identities should be not only accepted but cultivated, and that virginity and celibacy are at best strange and at worst pitiable states. And this master narrative, inevitably, makes both the new inequalities and the decline of actual relationships that much more difficult to bear …which in turn encourages people, as ever under modernity, to place their hope for escape from the costs of one revolution in a further one yet to come, be it political, social or technological, which will supply if not the promised utopia at least some form of redress for the many people that progress has obviously left behind.

There is an alternative, conservative response, of course — namely, that our widespread isolation and unhappiness and sterility might be dealt with by reviving or adapting older ideas about the virtues of monogamy and chastity and permanence and the special respect owed to the celibate.

So let me get this straight, the problem with sex in America is because of feminists and leftists but, “ the culture’s dominant message about sex is still essentially Hefnerian.”?  I've never known a single feminist or leftist who was not only okay with the views and attitudes about sex espoused by Hugh Hefner but who used them as the basis of their sexual ethics.   In fact, it has been the direct opposite.   Douthat's view of feminism and left-leaning is comical and beyond conservative stereotyping.  

But this is not the natural response for a society like ours. Instead we tend to look for fixes that seem to build on previous revolutions, rather than reverse them.

In the case of sexual liberation and its discontents, that’s unlikely to mean the kind of thoroughgoingly utopian reimagining of sexual desire that writers like Srinivasan think we should aspire toward, or anything quite so formal as the pro-redistribution political lobby of Hanson’s thought experiment.

By defacto argument, the sexual revolution was bad so men trying to come to terms with how to really treat women as equals would be a misguided approach to the problem.  We need to go back in time to when women had limited rights and almost none with regard to their bodies, their sexuality, and start from there in order to build a more perfect union where men get to get laid when they want by whomever they want.

But I expect the logic of commerce and technology will be consciously harnessed, as already in pornography, to address the unhappiness of incels, be they angry and dangerous or simply depressed and despairing. The left’s increasing zeal to transform prostitution into legalized and regulated “sex work” will have this end implicitly in mind, the libertarian (and general male) fascination with virtual-reality porn and sex robotswill increase as those technologies improve — and at a certain point, without anyone formally debating the idea of a right to sex, right-thinking people will simply come to agree that some such right exists, and that it makes sense to look to some combination of changed laws, new technologies and evolved mores to fulfill it.

Whether sex workers and sex robots can actually deliver real fulfillment is another matter. But that they will eventually be asked to do it, in service to a redistributive goal that for now still seems creepy or misogynist or radical, feels pretty much inevitable.

So, for Douthat, the need to address and placate incels is important but we shouldn't do it with legalizing prostitution or other means.  What Douthat is really saying is, “If men cannot dominate and be in control of women, then any sexual solution won't be acceptable.  Not legalized prostitution. Not sex robots.  Nothing short of actual, real women being subservient to men will do.”

At no point in this entire article by Douthat are men held responsible for their beliefs, for their actions.  NOT ONE SINGLE FUCKING TIME! “Feminists” and “left-leaning” people are the real reason behind backward thinking, immoral. egotistical men for behaving the way they do towards women. GTFOH!

[asoftjourneythroughrigidter-blog]

May 19, 2018: A week before my trek

Looking into the distance, past the Richmond skyline, I want to feel small. I watch the low clouds drift, imagining that below them the earth folds into peaks and valleys, interrupting the deliberately placed boxes lying flat on concrete beds. I envision being back in Colorado, where the mountains tell you which direction you are facing; massive landmarks providing a sense of direction. My body in relation to the land felt so apparent there, each motion felt significant; the landscape served as a reminder that I am a small component of a grand whole. I wondered if I would become numb to the privilege of being near the mountains, seeing them every day. I couldn’t imagine that the feeling of amazement would recede into the distance, buried in the panoramic view.

 I believe that becoming acquainted with landscape and observing it through many different vantage points can yield a sharper conscious of oneself and one’s position in the world. A sensory experience in the landscape can encourage emotional release, elicit empathetic responses, and establish a greater appreciation for the environment. When one is in a state of awe, awareness is heightened, the world suddenly becomes larger, curiosity is piqued, and questions begin to form, resulting in a visceral, transformative experience. Piff et al. analyze the experience of awe as a collective emotion, explaining:

  “…experiences of awe are unified by a core theme: perceptions of vastness that dramatically expand the observer’s usual frame of reference in some dimension or domain,” and that “… awe directs attention to entities vaster than the self and more collective dimensions of personal identity, and reduces the significance the individual attaches to personal concerns and goals.”

 There are many reasons that others and I experience awe when amidst the landscape. Recognizing a diverse, abundant, true life force, that is both microscopic and infinite in size –an entity that proceeds regardless of the attention it receives, and remains indifferent to person-awareness of it –presents respectful, fascinating and terrifying questions of the unknown. This mindfulness and unbiased awareness of landscape can heighten a sense of oneness with the environment, which I believe to be crucial in these tumultuous times.

 This union that I feel with the landscape has presented me with the question: How is it that I feel mindfully connected to an entity that is mindless to my mindfulness?

 My lifetime is an insignificant fraction of our 4.5 billion-year-old planet, where my body takes the space of a mere speck on its surface and makes observations through a very specific, biased, limited point of view that is both instinctual and shaped by human culture. I have witnessed innumerable injustices against the environment, and my perspective is bound by individual limitations, situated within the full grasp of human existence. The bulk of information I receive is through human-invented media, in which people have defined environmental decline and acceleration through bias. This, along with the impossibility of knowing everything, without the language and means of engagement to fully understand the environment and its inhabitants, can inevitably cause a distorted, narrow perspective of the environment.

 It is crucial to acknowledge, understand, and expand this narrow perspective to promote appreciation for fragile, exploited ecosystems, and ultimately, the well-being of our earth as a whole. The mistreatment of the environment and the domineering, human-centric presence of capitalist control is rooted deep in the western, cultural relationship to land. Therefore, this dominance which often controls land use and ownership must be dismantled through the very ways in which humans engage with and relate to the landscape.

  I, like many, fear for the future of natural ecosystems and the environment. There is urgency in speaking to environmental issues, in defense of a living entity that does not knowingly, immediately defend itself. The war on the environment has escalated increasingly in America; shores are open to drilling, national parks protections are being lifted, sprawls are expanding, culturally sacred lands are being desecrated, water sources are being contaminated, among many other devastations. Though ongoing efforts are being made to increase sustainability of the environment and natural resources, the pushback from capitalist corporations persists. Globally, the climate is responding with harsh seasons and natural disasters affecting communities without means of restoration or governmental support for rehabilitation.

 In my work, I explore ways one can observe a landscape and feel unified with it, acknowledging that this natural entity is one that humans cannot assume to understand fully. It has an existence outside of human cultural implications and observations, that cannot be controlled, and ultimately, that encompasses our very being. Through the experience of awe and through recognizing my personal position within the whole, I have further realized that I am connected to the environment. Developing a personal relationship with the landscape has allowed me to feel an empathetic alliance with the environment. Recognizing that records of the environment exist beyond human historical artifacts and their linguistic and textual definitions has challenged my epistemological connotations with the landscape. Acknowledging that both the environment and I exist within a domineering, patriarchal society that positions the landscape and I as inferior, has granted me the agency to empathize with the landscape in solidarity. The process of embracing a landscape/mindscape dualism through emotional connectedness with the land, while simultaneously pulling emotional responses from the landscape has enabled me to feel unified with the environment. The landscape has become my involuntary, indifferent lover. Our union emboldens my motives to challenge traditional representation of landscape and to amplify the landscape’s agency.

  A little about myself:

 I am a 26-year-old, radically soft, queer artist. I just graduated from VCU with my MFA in painting. Being inspired by the various landscapes that I have spent time experiencing throughout my life, I have decided that I want to embark on an 1800-mile trek on the Pacific Crest Trail. This is a very symbolic journey for me. My youth in Texas was fueled by the curiosity of the outdoors. I walked around lakes, collected feathers, and made friends with ducks. When I was old enough, I’d regularly drive to more secluded areas, walk and get lost in my thoughts. When I was 17, I’d get my first real taste of the Pacific’s beauty in Oregon. I was absolutely captivated by the landscape and knew I wanted to be there. I’d later drive to parks within reach; namely, the Wichita Mountains and the wild Ozarks. I moved to Colorado a few years ago, and I became a backcountry park ranger for a summer. I wanted to really familiarize myself with a park, and thus pursued a backcountry park ranger position. The thought of actively protecting the land, writing tickets for littering and enforcing rules that were to the advantage of the landscape, exhilarated me. To an extent, I could become a voice for the environment.

 I’d spend 40 hours a week monitoring the trails of Lake Pueblo State Park, ultimately on the south shore, where a tangled web of medium to high-grade trails cut through dynamic canyons and buttes. Along with enforcing rules to visitors, I was to analyze both human-constructed trails and natural structures to assess human accessibility; a goal of the parks, that others, too, could share this experience with the landscape. I had the responsibility of responding to any emergency on the trails. My state-issued walkie-talkie, always audible while on the clock, caused my stomach to drop each time a voice from dispatch echoed in the canyons. I rarely came across anyone while on patrol, only the occasional mountain biker who would ask me about trail grades, or lone hikers that I would ask, to leash their dog. Though I was confronted with anxieties of authority in this position, those moments of quiet between dispatch calls would remind me of my aspirations being there. To become acutely familiar with a land that I could never fully understand to the best of my ability, one that I was in the position to protect from minor human destructions was a form of intimacy that was unlike anything I had experienced.

  Following CO, I started grad school in Virginia, where Shenandoah National Park, became the next landscape I would familiarize myself with, being only 1.5 hours from me. I visited this park dozens of times while here. These visits would serve as a major contributor to my practice and overall wellbeing.

  After completing school, it seems to be the most logical time for me to do this trek. It’s been a rough year, I’ve experienced loss, and watched loved ones lose so much, while feeling absent, trapped in the grad school state-of-mind, which too often deferred self-care. Learning to manage depression while pursuing something that constantly requires your sharpest attention and motivation is tough. It is a vulnerable experience as an artist in a crit space, where often one’s most earnest personal position is up for criticism. Oftentimes it felt like open wounds were being poked and prodded at. I often doubted my ability while here; even working 8-14 hour days continuously, I never gave myself the credit for my work, always thinking I could have been doing more. My anxiety levels reached a peak, always fearing that I was forgetting something. Though this time was emotionally and physically exhausting, I feel like I have become much stronger. My department was a tight knit group, composed of incredible, generous individuals who became my family, of whom I am incredibly grateful to have worked with.

 I’m known to “overshare” my state of emotion. I don’t believe in censoring feeling, unless to protect myself. And now I am here, I am free of deadlines, free of second guessing my every thought, and of self-doubt. I have grown. I now wear armor over my soft interior, an armor that embraces my emotions and justifies my expression; an armor that allows oneself to feel weak, and finds power in resistance to societal pressures of emotional composure. “Radical Softness as a Weapon” as a term was coined by queer poet Lora Mathis, which embraces, “accepting your vulnerability in a society that considers it a weakness [as] a radical act.” -Lydia Luke

 I tightly clutch this vulnerability.

 Disclaimer: this blog is not intended to be an advice/self-care web-space.. And in no way am I suggesting that my personal coping mechanisms are the right way to manage depression, or for that matter are even healthy. I want this blog to feel open, and unbound to any particular voice. So I introduce these things because softness has felt really important to me this year. Writing all of this feels slightly narcissistic; in a sense it is a public diary, and who am I to say if any of this is even interesting?.. Don’t worry, I won’t be too revealing, throughout my accounts here.

 I suppose this voice functions similarly to my voice in the academic realm that I have been in this past two years, I have developed a hyper critical lens through which I experience the world, and functioning this way outside of grad school is inevitable at this time of my life. BUT.. I must stress, that I am not trying to frame this blog as a work of my practice. Ultimately I am taking this trip as a palette cleanser, I need to re-find myself outside of the institution.

 And so, I have mentioned a few things of what this blog is “not”…this blog ultimately serves as a record of my experiences on the PCT, and it is expected that I will go through some serious, self-reflective experiences in my times of solitude within an incredible, vast landscape. I start this hike with the intention of being present, being in tune with myself, now that I have nothing to become “distracted” by. I think that this journey gives one the permission to dismiss the notion of “distraction”.

 With my life at a major turning point, this seems like the best time for me to become lost and found (psychologically) and be with the landscape.

  I will fly to LA this Wednesday to see my best friend/sister before I depart this Saturday on my 1780 mile trek out of Vermillion Valley, CA and up to Canada, ending in early September.

  And so I leave, without any concerns but to keep trekking. Nothing on the agenda but to maintain myself and walk.

[ganymedesclock]

Hey in s1e1 Allura compares each of the pilots to the lions. I don't really remeber what they were something like Hunks caring personality, Pidge's inquisitive nature etc but Allura was cut off before revealing Lance and Blue's (by Lance lol) and I've always wondered what theirs was. Maybe u have a good idea cause ur really good and putting 2 and 2 together and finding X. Hope this makes sense.

Official interviews with the writers have stated Blue’s nature is compassion! She’s a nurturing presence described as the “mother hen” of the Lions. This makes a lot of sense because you can see Lance doing this a lot- like in s3e6, when he takes up a sniper nest, he checks on his teammates and watches them to see if and how they need help. Also in s3e3 Lance is the most aggressive and outspoken about how the team needs to stick together and helping them reunite.

This also is reflected a lot in how Blue relates to Allura in s3e3- she doesn’t respond to being ordered or commanded by Allura but instead responds very powerfully to Allura expressing vulnerability and asking for help- and basically the lesson she imparts to Allura is it’s okay to not control everything, other people are here to help you.

Throughout the show, Blue and Lance have repeated themes to their arc and interactions. There’s a sense of trusting situations- Lance often unlocks powers or discovers properties by just going into situations and sorta trusting it’ll work out and being mostly vindicated. The first thing Blue does is run wild and hurtle around at terrifying speeds and Lance noticeably isn’t scared that the Lion is out of his control, just caught off-guard at first. Anybody else in his situation would panic- think about how Shiro reacted when Black was moving without him in s2e7.

Allura begins her speech with “As you have found, the Lions choose their pilots” confirming that Blue had already selected Lance as her chosen paladin.

She continues, “The quintessence of the pilot is mirrored in his Lion.”

So simply enough, we can tell something about the Lions by the paladins they first approached- the Lions seek people who are mirrors of themselves. 

Ergo, Blue was drawn to Lance by being able to see his empathy and compassion as a person- the same kind of spirit that drew him to defend Pidge. He has that sort of empathetic, emotionally wise and supportive nature- as well as a certain openness to things working out. I think it’s significant that Lance got his Lion first- because Lance is the sort of person who would take Blue at face value.

Walking into the mouth of a giant robotic predator and plunking himself in the seat just because she’s indicating for him to do so, because it feels right, because he lets Blue into his heart and mind without hesitation or fear- Lance is opening himself wide up because to connect to anything, he connects emotionally. 

This is nicely embodied in that Blue’s element is water. Water is often seen as an embodiment of the emotional world and the subconscious. I’ve said this before but while all of the paladins have emotional conflicts, Lance is the one who knows the most about his and will often be seen taking initiative and discussing them quickly, rather than waiting to explode.

Onto the other Lions... Allura describes Black, first:

The Black Lion is the decisive head of Voltron. It will take a pilot who is a born leader and in control at all times, someone whose men will follow without hesitation. That is why Shiro, you will pilot the Black Lion.

The first adjective given to Black is decisive. The reasoning and decision-making head, which on a human body is the nexus of sensory information and the seat of the nervous system. Understand, take in information as fed by the limbs and act on it.

“In control at all times”, however, tells us that this is not just the cozy seat of the commander. The Black Lion is a heavy burden. You have to consider what control tends to mean for Shiro, someone who is keenly contextualized by trauma, imprisonment, and the anxiety disorder that sprung from it.

“In control” means staying ahead of mental demons. It means having autonomy over his own life and mind, things that the empire is all too eager to take away from him.

From the start, Black evokes this concept of the heavy crown- royalty in the purest sense, a leader who even bereft of regalia or title is seen and known as a king. A person crowned simply because they are charismatic, wise, and assertive- someone people reflexively look to for leadership. And also, a heavily burdened, weighted individual.

Black is represented by space- the sky at its most unbounded, the most liberating. When all Lions are empowered by their element, Black commands the greatest domain, and their massive scarlet wings are a promise of ruling that domain, of soaring through it. That’s a potent promise to make to an ex-prisoner.

But at the same time, space is also the sky at its most transient- space is a vacuum. The seat of Black’s power, this infinite kingdom, is also nothingness. It cannot be held in the hand, it cannot be touched.

Black is thematically associated with the juxtaposition of opposites. The imagery of an eclipse, and teleportation abilities that allow the user to be both present and absent- there and not, disappearing but asserting themselves.

“In control” of the Black Lion is to walk a tightrope act between power and mercy, fear and certainty. It is to command, but to also surrender oneself to trust. Shiro out of the team is the one most often confronted by a sense of helplessness.

So what sums up the Black Paladin? A mind under heavy pressure. That’s a hell of a challenge, and this is why we can see that the Black Paladin mentality can break, can fall off the tightrope in so many ways. Zarkon fell off the tightrope one way- arrogance, refusal to heed the warnings of his senses, disconnect from the limbs, leadership turned into tyranny. And in s3 and s4, Shiro falls off a different way- lack of self-worth, guilt, internalizing, trying to hand the burden to someone else because he assumes he’s no longer worthy of the throne.

But we’re not giving up on Shiro just yet- and he has the potential to rise above the situation.

The Green Lion has an inquisitive personality, and needs a pilot of intellect and daring. Pidge, you will pilot the Green Lion.

Curiosity is the defining trait of the Green Lion. A desire to know, a desire to investigate. I think that this can sometimes lend an overly benign image to Green, that people read her as fundamentally childish, “ooh, what’s this?” but there’s something else here, and something that’s illustrated big time in s2e4.

Green is represented by nature and plant life, but also technology. When Pidge deepens her bond with Green, we’re treated to an image of roots growing upwards and transforming into circuitry.

Simply, Green represents the concept of evolution. Grow, change, and become something entirely new- radically recreate your identity to thrive in an environment previously hostile to you. Quite apt for Pidge who created a new identity to find her family.

But that comes back to the concept of “daring”. If Green was just an overexcited investigative toddler then you wouldn’t need to be ‘daring’- daring suggests boldness, a certain degree of assertion in the face of problems. Which makes sense- it takes some serious determination to try and grow where you’re not welcome. Curiosity, for Green, comes with a spirit of relentlessness- it’s the tenacity with which a forest retakes the four-lane highway cut through it, pothole by pothole, weed by weed.

It’s the willpower required to fight your way through setbacks, failed harvests, and to exploit a mind that naturally thinks outside of the box against situations that are unkind. Interviews have also stated the Green Lion is not a destructive creature by nature- Green would rather find a way to open the puzzle box than take a hammer to it. Which also reflects well Pidge’s propensity for stealthy, technical fighting.

The Yellow Lion is caring and kind. Its pilot is one who puts the needs of others above his own. His heart must be mighty. As the leg of Voltron, you will lift the team up and hold them together.

This gives us a bit of insight into legs in general, which is needed since Lance just set himself up to be skipped, but it tells us some interesting things about the Yellow Lion.

Taken alone, this summary sounds very sacrificial, that the Yellow Lion runs himself ragged to protect others. But this is contextualized very differently when we see the Yellow Lion himself.

Yellow is an armored juggernaut commanding the greatest defensive armaments and a body that can smash directly through most adversaries. He’s the quintessential defensive force on Voltron, the most fortified Lion- set diagonally across from Red, the quintessential offensive force and least defensive Lion.

Yellow’s relationship with his allies is that he is a shield and a foundation to others- he’s the leg that anchors Voltron to the earth below them and, in the manner of Atlas, takes the world onto his shoulders. Yellow’s burden is heavy, but Allura emphasizes that “his heart must be mighty”- the role of Yellow Paladin is gifted to those who are built for this, who have the strength and force of will.

And again, this sometimes creates more of a benign image than what we see in practice. The Yellow Lion is forceful and assured. In contrast to Blue, who presides over the realm of the emotions, Yellow rules the very material and practical realm- and he is particularly concerned with threats. He makes a shield of his own flesh to deny enemies access to his allies, but he also won’t sit there passively in the face of those foes- in inclination to take care of his own, the Yellow Lion will level mountains, tear through steel, shatter stone. Strength of will, strength of body, the determination of a protector who says “No, I don’t think so, you aren’t getting at my friends today.”

And, sometimes, slams into said friends hard enough to send them spinning.

The Red Lion is temperamental and the most difficult to master. It’s faster and more agile than the others, but also more unstable. Its pilot needs to be someone who relies more on instinct than skill alone. Keith, you will fly the Red Lion.

At first glance Red- and Keith himself- seem to be arrogant loners. “Temperamental”? Too cool for everybody else?

But this is a false pretense through and through, and the rest of the description warns us about that. “Unstable.” “Relies on instinct.” Red is a glass cannon of a Lion- the greatest damage output, but something he pays for with the greatest fragility.

Again, the more we understand of Keith, what at a glance seems like hotshot confidence, not needing a team, is actually self-sufficiency born out of a lifetime of isolation. The instability and temper of the Red Lion is born from a sense of being wounded- grief, loss, and isolation. Red is needy, loyal, and the most aggressively responsive to his paladin in danger. In s2e6, Allura tells us that Red wasn’t like this before- the Lions never did this before.

Red’s prior paladin, Alfor, was surrounded by people, and largely, happy. His loyalty and commitment to his family as the literal right hand of the paladins was rewarded by a relatively long peacetime, the esteem of his peers, the adoration of his people. Those who were close to Alfor have nothing but good things to say about him. It’s a big deal in the flashback when Zarkon actually argues with Alfor over the rift.

But that happiness crumbled. Alfor died trying to save everyone else from what became of the rift, of Zarkon. In loyalty, he left himself behind as a sacrifice- in duty, he faced Zarkon alone, trying to take responsibility for his commander. The person he trusted.

And Red followed Alfor with bonding to Keith. Keith- the orphan of uncertain history- Keith, not a loner, but lonely. And connecting to Keith, we see Red with newfound anxiety, newfound sense of loss, newfound fear.

At his best, Red affords an insight beyond conventional means. It was Red who was able to reveal to Alfor the nature of Voltron and what their bodies needed to be- the nature of the paladin bond. Red is the oracle of Voltron. Like his combat capabilities, this is a potent advantage.

And yet, like fire, Red is needy. More than the other elements, fire can starve and weaken very easily. It can be destroyed, disrupted, extinguished- or rear up too greatly and destroy others around it. Fire can only thrive, really, with the nurturing graces of the other elements. Wood to feed it, air it can breathe. Water and earth to bank it and stop it from blazing out of control.

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

sarah (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): In 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump skipped out on the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, but this year he dominated the group’s event with his speech on Sunday, which marked his first major public event since leaving the White House.

[Related: The GOP Might Still Be Trump’s Party. But That Doesn’t Mean There’s Room For Him.]

Most former presidents generally take a step back from the political limelight once leaving office, but Trump doesn’t seem likely to do that. That means, in many ways, the next four years could be another Trump-fueled media cycle: centered on divisions within the GOP, with questions about how they affect Democrats’ strategy and, of course, how much the media should (or shouldn’t) be covering Trump.

Let’s break this chat into three parts:

How should the Republican Party think about Trump’s continued presence? Kingmaker? Or faction leader?

How should Democrats think about his continued role? That is, if Trump’s vision of the GOP wins out, how does that help (or hurt) Democrats politically?

And finally, how should the media cover Trump now that he is out of the White House? Are there journalistic questions of how much coverage he should receive? Or is that beside the point, especially if he runs in 2024?

Let’s start with the Republican Party. One question that is going to keep coming up is whether the GOP is divided. My question to you all is: Is it?

alex (Alex Samuels, politics reporter): In my opinion, no. The GOP is still the party of Trump, and I think his speech Sunday night proved a lot of that. What we saw at CPAC — over and over (and over) again — was a good number of politicians lavishing praise on the former president.

There weren’t any dissenting opinions, and the Liz Cheneys/Mitt Romneys of the party 1) were not invited, 2) declined to speak and/or 3) were booed at the rally by Trump and his supporters. Trump has his thumb on the scale of the party currently, and I don’t think the minority of anti-Trump Republicans is strong enough right now to fundamentally drive a wedge through the GOP

lee.drutman (Lee Drutman, senior fellow at New America and FiveThirtyEight contributor): I do think, though, that the GOP is divided in terms of policy priorities, which is why there was very little discussion of policy at CPAC. The GOP is not, however, divided in terms of whether or not Trump is still the alpha male of the party. In the absence of a clear challenger, or a clear opposition faction, Trump is still very much in charge.

perry (Perry Bacon Jr., senior writer): There are different blocs in the GOP. In my view, there are: 1) the most Trumpy people (so say Rep. Jim Jordan in the House), 2) the anti-Trump people like Cheney, 3) the rest of the people in the party, who are fairly pro-Trump but may not be totally on board with everything he says or with him running in 2024. I think Group 3 is most Republicans, and Group 2 is very small.

But, Lee, what do you think are the policy divides? That seems right to me, but I don’t know what the policies are, so I don’t know what the divides are.

lee.drutman: I think the big policy divides are over economics. There is a wing of the party, led by Sen. Josh Hawley, that very much wants to lean into being a “workers party” with higher minimum wage, strong antitrust laws, etc. Then there is a more traditional libertarian economic wing, which is skeptical of all that. These divisions are below the surface, and probably will remain so long as Republicans are in the opposition. But we could see them play out at the state level.

alex: This was an interesting read on how young conservatives are split from Trump and their elders on foreign policy, too.

lee.drutman: On one level, it seems odd that CPAC leaned into “cancel culture,” since that is nowhere near a priority issue for most Americans. But on another level, it makes total sense. It’s a purely symbolic issue that can unite Republicans, and it also taps into a kind of grievance politics that has been successful for Republicans, proving great for fundraising and engagement.

sarah: But the fact that CPAC chose to lean into “cancel culture” instead of policy is telling, right?

[Related: What Comes Next For QAnon Followers]

lee.drutman: It’s very telling. And it’s exactly what the Republican National Committee did during its convention. Everything is about conservative values being under siege and about ‘radical liberal socialist Democrats’ trying to somehow change America, and Republicans fighting back against that. It’s a classic preservation story.

But the result of that is there is no forward-looking policy agenda, or at least nothing more than a handful of Republicans could agree on.

sarah: So how should the Republican Party think about Trump’s continued presence? Kingmaker? Or more of a faction leader?

lee.drutman: I think of Trump as the presumptive 2024 nominee.

sarah: Really?! Tell us why.

lee.drutman: Well, simply because he’s way ahead in the polling, and clearly wants to run again.

sarah: Are you talking about that CPAC straw poll?

lee.drutman: I was thinking about polling after the Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6 that found that a majority of Republican voters would support him in the 2024 primary (54 percent). That was way more support than any other Republican received.

sarah: Ah, I wouldn’t put too much stock in any general head-to-head polls this far out. They’re just not that predictive. Also, this is not a scientific poll, but the fact that Trump won only 55 percent of support in that CPAC straw poll is telling. Yes, it was still far more than any other candidate, but CPAC is his core base, and yet, 45 percent of attendees said they’d vote for someone other than Trump in the 2024 Republican primary. He’s obviously still very influential in GOP politics, but I think we lose sight that we’ve still got three years to go until 2024.

alex: I’d say Trump is a kingmaker. I think a lot of this boils down to the fact that Trump supporters still love Trump. Even after Jan. 6, 59 percent of GOP voters said Trump should still have a “major role” in the Republican Party going forward.

This is a rhetorical question I have, but what’s in it for the Trump loyalists at this point? Especially those with 2024 aspirations? Take Sen. Ted Cruz, for example, who netted single-digits in the straw poll. If Trump runs in 2024, where does that leave him?

lee.drutman: I think a lot of these single-digit pollers, like Cruz, are hoping that if Trump bows out, they can be his chosen successor, or if Trump does run, perhaps his running mate. At this point, they’re in too deep to have any other aspirations.

sarah: That’s right, and I’d assume, too, that over the next four years there is going to be a tendency to dismiss the Trump loyalists as only capable of showing fealty to Trump, but I think that’s shortsighted.

This wing of the party has spokespeople. They were at CPAC (Gov. Ron DeSantis, Sen. Rick Scott), and I think are presumably testing the waters for a bid. So maybe Cruz’s big takeaway from the weekend is that he shouldn’t run 😂 Meanwhile, DeSantis might seriously want to consider a bid (he won the CPAC straw poll that didn’t feature Trump.)

Remember, a much higher share of attendees — 95 percent — said they wanted the Republican Party to stick to Trump’s policies and agenda than endorsed him running again. So his policies/approach to politics isn’t going anywhere, even if he’s not the one to carry out the message.

But let’s pivot to how Democrats think about his continued role? That is, if Trump’s vision of the GOP wins out, how does that help (or hurt) Democrats politically?

lee.drutman: Democrats are facing tough headwinds because historically, the president’s party loses seats in the midterm elections, and Republicans are about to go on a binge of passing restrictive voting rules on the state level. Not to mention, they largely control the redistricting process.

But, since Trump is broadly unpopular and useful as a mobilizing/fundraising villain, I suspect Democrats are going to lean into Republicans as the party of Trump in their messaging and spend a lot of time on what happened on Jan. 6. And this helps Democrats on the margins, by reminding modestly affluent suburban constituencies in key swing districts what’s at stake, but I’m not sure it’s enough if Republicans turn the gerrymandering/voter suppression dials to 11.

alex: If Trump is still in the driver’s seat, an argument that Democrats could use is that you can’t separate those in the party from their leader — even if you have some GOP outliers. What Democrats have long argued is that even anti-Trump Republicans can’t cherry-pick the former president’s legacy: Republicans own Trump’s policies, and that included his tax cuts, a crackdown on immigration and unsuccessful efforts to undo the Affordable Care Act. Plus, a majority of Republicans at least implicitly supported aspects of Trumpism, like his anti-immigrant sentiment and the racism on display from those who stormed the U.S. Capitol, including white supremacists.

perry: A Republican Party deeply invested in Trump is going to be deeply invested in defending “the big lie” (that Trump won) and deeply invested in trying to make it harder for Democrats to vote and not willing to accept Democratic victories. So in some ways, a Trump-led GOP is a problem for Democrats but also for those who support values conducive to democracy.

alex: I agree there, Perry.

[Related: In America’s ‘Uncivil War,’ Republicans Are The Aggressors]

lee.drutman: The “big lie” is also going to be very powerful for Republican fundraising efforts going into 2022. There’s nothing like grievance politics to shake loose the donations, and I have to wonder if that’s part of the strategy here.

alex: Another rhetorical question I have is whether Republican fundraising efforts will be different from Trump’s fundraising efforts (i.e., will someone like McCarthy have to choose between the former president, who is a great fundraiser and has a history of supporting winning candidates, and his own incumbents?).

lee.drutman: I’d bet we’re going to see the former president on an awful lot of fundraising emails from both parties over the next cycle.

sarah: With the midterms coming up and Republicans defending 20 of 34 seats up for election in the Senate, I think Democrats are eager for there to be drama in the GOP. I just question how much drama/division there really is, as I’m not entirely sure Democrats have super figured out how to run against a Trump-like candidate super effectively.

But OK, let’s pivot to how the media should cover Trump now that he is out of the White House. Are there thorny questions of how much coverage he should receive? Or is that neither here nor there — this is a former president we’re talking about — and if he runs in 2024, that is news.

alex: I think the answer here is pretty simple. We’d cover Trump the same way we’d cover any other former president: If he makes news, we write a story about it. (Or chat about it!) And so far, Trump is still doing that. I do think part of the reason we’re asking this question, though, is because Trump left a lasting impact on the Republican Party in a way we haven’t seen in former presidents in quite some time. Usually, former presidents stay out of the limelight for a bit. Trump has not. So I think media institutions are rightly wrestling with the question of “where do we go from here?”

lee.drutman: This is a really hard question. On the one hand, he is the former president, probably the GOP front-runner and, at the very least, a highly influential kingmaker, so what he does is news.

On the other hand, Trump has also cracked the code on how to get attention, which is to be always starting fights because the media is inherently drawn to conflict. So there is a challenge for the media to exercise some judgement and restraint. Some of what Trump does might be newsworthy, but a lot of it will just be trying to get attention for the sake of getting attention.

In fact, I’d argue that Trump is currently the GOP front-runner precisely because the media gives him a level of sustained attention that no other candidate gets.

alex: Yeah, Lee. There are now definitely questions like “is Trump just sucking oxygen out of the room since he’s not a 2024 candidate (at least not yet!), and “is the media covering him in lieu of covering other things, like certain policy issues?”

[Democrats Are Split Over How Much The Party And American Democracy Itself Are In Danger]

perry: Trump is a relevant person to cover, of course. But I am seeing outlets essentially designate reporters to cover Trump, and I think that is a mistake. We are already getting too much “sources close to Trump” style coverage. Take, for example, that there were days of coverage about his CPAC appearance before it happened on Sunday.

Trump is not the president — so I am not sure I need to read all about his musings or what his aides are saying anonymously. To me, the media is in danger of covering Trump a lot because he is interesting and clicky, but not really covering “Trumpism,” and I think the latter is more important.

We need more stories on how state and local Republicans with power are pushing the identity politics and antidemocraic tactics of Trump right now, and fewer stories speculating about which candidates Trump personally is going to endorse for elections happening 15 months from now.

“What is going on with the Repubilcan Party?” and “what is going on with Trump?” are related but distinct questions. I worry that coverage of the second is going to become basically all of the coverage of the first. Every conflict and debate in the Republican Party is not best covered through the lens of Trump.

lee.drutman: You’re absolutely right, Perry. But what is Trumpism? Is it just “owning the libs” and perpetuating the “big lie” to roll back democracy at the state level?

sarah: That’s such a good point, Perry. And a good question, Lee. I’m not sure we know yet what Trumpism is. It’s still being defined.

alex: If CPAC taught us anything, though, I would say that Trumpism definitely includes a pushback against cancel-culture “wokeness.”

lee.drutman: Yes, Alex, totally agree, and as I said earlier I think the anti-cancel culture is the perfect symbolic issue to unite the party, avoid policy fights and fundraise.

sarah: There’s definitely the risk of a dangerous feedback loop in covering Trump here, though. The last four years showed us that Trump’s antics sell, and as such, the media often covers him in an undiscerning, play-by-play manner, missing the larger stakes, as Perry pointed out.

Readers gain little from that type of coverage, so it’ll be a challenge in the next four years to make sure our coverage reflects more of the stakes and less of the Trump-specific drama.

[plantsense]

part 3/3

What Can Plants Teach Us About Threats?

Do threats always need to be contained, where you either eradicate them or succumb to them? Can taking a hit actually boost personal integrity?

A threat is “a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger” (Lexico.com). Humans, plants, animals, and even the planet face threats every day. From hawks and caterpillars to poverty and oppression; from contaminated water and rising temperatures to disease and resource scarcity, threats are ubiquitous. Our clovers faced the threat of a dandelion invasion. Humans right now are facing the threat of Covid-19.

Plants and animals have similar problem solving algorithms to evaluate and address these threats, but we utilize our energy in different ways. In response to a threat, we each start with the go-to tools from our repertoires. Sometimes we’re well-prepared and that’s that and we carry on. Other times the threat is a bigger one, or a novel one, or working in combination with another one. Our tools aren’t enough and we don’t know what to do next. Should we throw our hands up in despair? Let’s dig a little deeper.

People-Like Plants

Our comic follows a community of clovers trying hard to survive a dandelion invasion. They protect themselves using classic human/animal strategies in an attempt to control the situation they find themselves in. They attack, avoid, numb, and panic in response to their new neighbors -- anything to avoid having to admit defeat and share space. They show classic human fight, flight, freeze and fawn responses, and they aren’t successful at eradicating the threat.

People, particularly when entrenched in systemic privilege, work to maintain status quo by controlling our surroundings and situations. We’re so good at it, in fact, that we’ve forgotten what to do when threat eradication doesn’t work or isn’t enough. We resign ourselves to a path of blinders, numbing, and denial in a primal attempt at self-preservation. To escape that pain, we double our efforts. Threat, begone!

“But escape is not a solution; at most, it is a way of sidestepping a problem. Animals therefore do not solve problems, they simply avoid them more efficiently” - Stefano Mancuso, The Revolutionary Genius of Plants

Plant-like plants do it differently. Plants know all about radical acceptance, and differentiate between acceptance and defeat. They face a myriad of threats including crowding, caterpillars, drought, shade, disease, and the farmer’s plow. Being literally rooted to the ground, however, means they can’t flee, and lacking bones and muscles, they’re also severely limited in their ability to attack and fight.

What tools do plants have to maintain their integrity? Some level of sacrifice is assumed in the wisdom of plant resilience, and time moves much more slowly in their world. By necessity, plants are closely tuned into their environment, learning from experience, and changing themselves -- instead of their environment -- in order to adapt to it. In this way, they develop different sorts of defense mechanisms. For example, in response to being munched, some plants can sound the alarm via their root networks, alerting neighbors that predators are near. The whole community will then boost bitter tasting compounds in their leaves to become less appealing. Alternatively, a plant might call for help, releasing a chemical to attract natural predators of the insects feasting on them. On a longer timescale, when a plant wilts from lack of water, or suffers from lack of sun, it can respond by growing a more extensive root system, or larger, darker leaves to better capture limited sunlight. They even use epigenetics to encode more drought or shade resilience into the next generation.

Conversely, if a plant has never been nibbled by a caterpillar, then it doesn’t learn how to defend itself. It stays evolutionarily immature, weak, and stagnant. The plant uses the experience of being nibbled to gather intelligence and act. While people panic when they can’t escape a threat, plants bravely stand tall in their radical acceptance of the environment.

Plant-Like People and Communities

"I can be changed by what happens to me. But I refuse to be reduced by it." ― Maya Angelou

Like plants, we can work together to understand the nuances of a problem, educate ourselves, and own our decisions. Instead of resigning, denying and stagnating, we can heed each other’s warnings and learn from everyone’s successes and mistakes. We can iterate and evolve so we’re better prepared next time.

Looking at the example of Covid-19, we have a humbling virus that keeps us in check -- our behavior, our drive, our oppression, even our stress responses that seem to be working in a constant low grade overdrive. Our initial response of shelter-in-place surfaced a host of other problems that can no longer be ignored. We’re witnessing firsthand just how fragile the structure of our US economy is, being built on a foundation of systemic oppression and exploitation. We have a new understanding of the nuances of social interaction needs and what’s necessary, what’s fluff, what just gets in the way, and what could be so much better, if done differently. Many educators and parents are reexamining the pedagogy of the education system, and weakness in foodways are becoming clear. The threats are coming from so many directions, we can’t just escape them piecemeal anymore.

Plant-like communities of people utilize collective brainpower across the world to problem solve a shared threat. For example, the field of virology made significant advances in response to the Spanish Flu of 1918 and we’re coming together now to understand the current virus at record speeds. Each country and region has responded to the virus in different ways. We’ve ragged on Sweden and Florida or adored South Korea and New Zealand. But we can compare notes to see what’s working and what’s not and use that as intelligence to inform our next steps. Because of current shelter-in-place orders, we now have more data to address climate change. Indirectly, this pandemic has called global attention and energy to finally address systemic oppression. George Floyd’s murder was the last straw and now we’ve got the resources and fire to look deeper than the usual narratives.

Plant-like people might realize how busy their lives were and how slowing down and resting (gasp!) can have benefits. We might put more energy into our self-care routines, focusing on the areas that the virus tends to attack. We re-evaluate our priorities and use our fight or flight energy to not escape a threat, but to tune into what we genuinely need.

When our human tools to maintain status quo run out, plants remind us that it doesn’t have to be game over; it’s not the end of the story. The story has just begun.

Further Resources

The Revolutionary Genius of Plants by Stefano Mancuso

Plants Use Underground Communication to Learn When Plants are Stressed

Plants Communicate to Warn Against Danger

Video on the Amazing Ways that Plants Defend Themselves

Stress-induced Memory Alters Growth of Clonal Offspring of White Clover

Forget Homeschooling During the Pandemic. Teach Life Skills Instead

What Needs to Change in America’s Food System

Discovery and characterization of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus in historical context

Richard E. Shope, 1957 Albert Lasker Award

Climate Change and Coronavirus

[biointernet]

What is Consciousness?

WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS?

Konstantin Korotkov, PhD, Prof.

St. Petersburg University of Informational Technologies, Mechanics and Optics St. Petersburg, Russia “I sent my Soul through the Invisible, Some letter of that After-life to spell: And by and by my Soul return'd to me, And answer'd “I Myself am Heav'n and Hel” Omar Khayyam (1048-1131) First step in science is to give a definition. People often argue for hours about certain topics, defending different positions, but in reality, they are talking about different things: everyone keepS in mind his or her own understanding of the topic. So let us start with definitions of what we understand by the term “Consciousness”. The history of attempts to build a rigorous, not intuitive definition of consciousness is rooted in the distant past. Moreover, all these attempts are inevitably based on an a priori division of the whole of nature into conscious and unconscious: the definition should only formally draw this border exactly where expected. Depending on this, the authors of the concept make statements about the adequacy of the specific wording. Definitions based on this division, are subjective and, biased, most often in favor of Homo sapiens. With this approach, avoiding logical tautology is not possible in principle. Furthermore: being the foundation for experiments, such an approach to the definition of consciousness inevitably leads to incorrect results. Thus, in the well-known experiment the experimenter removes the bell from the entrance to the wasp nest, and the wasp completes a new one. Further, he makes a hole in the tube bend before the bell, and the wasp builds both the tube, and the bell. “Aha!” says the experimenter, “Now you see, the wasp has no reason!” But if aliens, as an experiment, make a hole in somebody’s shirt over and over again, the person will first try to patch them, then he will buy new shirt, but eventually he will throw them out of the window, swearing and pounding his feet. “Aha!” the alien will say, “Now you see, Man has no reason!” The reason here is that we assume a priori which behavior is reasonable and which is not. Experimenting not on ants and wasps, but on a man working on an assembly line, you would find just as strong evidence that he is no more than a biorobot. The Persian mathematician, astronomer, philosopher, and poet entertainment industry and a TV program guide can provide us with even more impressive indication of the total lack of human reason. In our studies we use the following definition: Consciousness is a property (ability) of natural objects to form abstract representations of the outside material world, suitable for use in purposeful activity through sensory perception.

In more simple form: Consciousness is the ability of a subject to react to environmental information and change its behavior in accordance with this information. From this point of view, every living organism possesses consciousness: all animals, large and small above ground and under, in the air and in water; plants; microorganisms and every cell of our body. At the same time, inanimate subjects do not possess consciousness: stone may be warmed by the sun, but it will not move or change its color to avoid overheating. But how about robots – in accordance with this definition some of them possess consciousness? From our point of view, robots replicate elements of the consciousness of their creators. Living beings are able to modify their features in case of rapid changes in circumstance even at the cost of death of part of the population. Of course, to some extent: out of millions of years during the kingdom of dinosaurs only crocodiles were able to survive. Robots may behave in accordance with a program, designed by engineers, and their ability to modify is quite limited. At least, within the limits of known technologies. All discussions above are related to the first, basic levels of consciousness. Next level of consciousness is the ability of a subject to predict future events, remember past events, plan and modify its behavior to meet future situations in accordance with their experiences. This level is characteristic of for higher animals and humans. All owners of cats and dogs know that their pets may be very smart when it comes to not only their favorite food, but often to their relationships with their masters. Interesting examples were presented in the book by Rupert Sheldrake “Dogs That Know Their Owners are Coming Home” (1999). Seven experiments demonstrated that dogs were able to predict their masters’ return and were waiting near by the door. We know many stories about conscious behavior of dolphins and elephants, not to mention monkeys and crows. All mentally healthy people have this level of consciousness, albeit to different extents. Children possess this level at the age of two-three years. Next level of consciousness is the ability to generate new ideas, exchange these ideas with others, transmit them to next generations and manifest them in objective reality. Only humans possess this ability. Ants build their huts in the same way for millennia, as do bees, birds and many other animals. We cannot explain how they achieved this ability, who taught them, but they never changed the structure of their constructions. Very rarely do they introduce new elements acquired by random trials. For humans, creativity is the basis of the development of civilization. Artists, poets, architects, scientists, and many other creative people have advanced our civilization, and the whole of today’s modern world is created only through the constant generation of new ideas. Some people generate new ideas, others turn them into reality. Many smart people reach this level of consciousness in their work, which allows them to take everyday decisions, based on knowledge, experience and intuition. All successful business people, politicians, teachers, engineers, builders and many other professionals have to generate and use new ideas in their everyday practice. It is so common, that people often do not pay attention to this process. Only in this way can humankind develop and create new steps in our civilization. A high level of consciousness is the ability to generate ideas, which are not based on the existing level of social development and knowledge and which transforms society, moving it to the next level of civilization. Presumably, they do it by connecting to the Universal Informational Field and receiving direct information from the Higher Planes of Consciousness. We can name particular people in known to us history, who was able to reach this level. First of all, these are Great Spiritual Teachers, like Moses, Zarathustra, Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed. They were able to give people new understanding of their lives; formulate spiritual laws, which govern millions of people for thousands of years. In different words, in different languages they were speaking about the same things – about human life, human soul and the role of humans in the Universe. Now we understand, that all religions give the same message, they all have the same spiritual content, same deep meaning. Great Teachers were able to present people complicated spiritual ideas in simple, understandable words. In A short time their teachings have been accepted by millions of people, because they allowed every individual to reach new levels of spiritual development. Moreover, all these teachings have existed for thousands of years, they do not die and they transform in accordance with the development of society. We do not need to mix Spiritual Teachings with human institutions; Religious organizations are social structures, organized by particular people in specific socio- historical periods. They were initially designed to help people in their everyday needs, to help them survive harsh conditions, explain spiritual ideas in understandable words, but soon they were transformed into social institutions and have been used in the Power Games of Rulers. We know how many crimes have been conducted under the name of God, millions of people have been tortured and killed by religious fanatics, in religious wars, and this process is not over yet. All we discussed above is related to individual consciousness, but we, humans, also possess a Collective Consciousness. We are the only creatures on Earth, which have both individual and collective consciousness. This is our powerful tool for development, for the creation of Civilization. We join our individual minds as neurons in the brain, thousand times increasing group intellectual power. Formation of civilization became possible only when people started living in big groups, when they formed first cities, generating extra products, which allowed more and more people not to be involved in the everyday struggle for survival. Combining their brains, their abilities, people were able to make the next steps in civilizational development. We’ll discuss this topic in the following chapters. Of course, our definitions are only some of the possible way to discuss consciousness. You may find many different approaches in modern science. Our aim was to give definitions, which we may use in our research, developing experiments, which may help us to understand some enigmas of human existence.

WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS? The more we perceive the world around us, the more it startles us by its complexity. The boundaries of our knowledge are continuously moving aside, making the process of cognition in the ongoing race, beyond the horizon. On this way, many obvious and universally accepted theses periodically become paradoxical and ambiguous; many representations die or radically change. The true way of all science goes through crises and paradigm shifts to new crises. This path is endless, convoluted and tortuous, but there is no other way. A direct mechanical transfer of representations from the ant-hill to human society is impossible; however, the study of these “parallel worlds” can give the same long- anticipated push for a new round of scientific development predicted by many scientists of the planet. Consciousness is the ideal category, the basic imperative along with Matter and Information. In modern science we do not have – either in medicine or in biology - the notion of consciousness; we only take the first steps in understanding this concept. Obviously, even just a transition to micro or macro-world is accompanied by changes in ideas about what consciousness is, as it is difficult to talk about any expected behavior. From a bird's eye view, people’s behavior on the streets of a city, observed in time lapse is strangely reminiscent of an anthill or a beehive. A worker on an assembly line, at first glance, behaves in the same way as an ant. However, this is only a superficial similarity. The assembly line for a worker is only one of his numerous functions: he can also be the caring father of a family, an angler, a collector, a reader of novels, a spectator, or a member of a political party. When conditions change, the worker can respond irrespective OF to his work program, and even in spite of it. The worker can go on strike and demand change in his conditions. We know nothing about the strikes of ants. Therefore, it is beneficial to replace the worker with a robot, whose behavior is fully consistent with the ant psychology. It is noteworthy that the rigid structure of a collective, being surprisingly stable for ants and having ensured their survival for hundreds of millions of years with all the changes in the environment, turned to be totally unsustainable for the human society; even being forcibly established and guarded, it spontaneously disintegrates in an historically short term. We may see in history that any Empire exist about 1000 years, and then disintegrates, being replaced by a new Empire. We observe this pattern throughout all human history, regardless of nation or continent. Some social formations exist for much shorter periods, just seconds from an historical perspective. The socialist system existed for 70 years, and quietly broke up without any pressure from outside. It is obvious that with the suppression of the Individual Conscience in the name of the Collective in human society, the fundamental laws of life of the noosphere, the laws of the stability of a complexly organized system are violated. The Communist model of the structure of a society is perfect for protozoa and insects; however, all attempts to introduce it for people, - beings with a more complex organization,- are not viable. We did not mention such notions as “unconsciousness”, “subconscipusness” and “superconsciousness”, obligatory in modern psychology. You may find thousands of books discussing these topics. We presume that readers understand their meaning. The reason is these are descriptions of brain functioning, interrelations between different parts of the brain, in particular, left and right hemispheres, in the processing of received information. It is well known that we take in much more information, than we are aware of. The brain processes all the information and presents to our attention only a small part of it. This process depends on a person, the situation at the time and the importance of the information. Intuitive people may process much more information from the environment compared with less intuitive ones. In our definitions, this is related to activity at different levels of consciousness. I would say, they describe inner mechanisms of informational processing, while in our definitions we are focused on the outcome of this process. In addition, it makes us look differently at the definition of the concept of “consciousness”. This notion is a key in the area of sciences related to man. The basic concepts of any scientific theory are primary, i.e., are not defined in terms of other previously introduced concepts, but are introduced intuitively. They define the whole future course of possible arguments; a good example is to recall how different is the geometry of Euclid and Lobachevsky- Riemann, with different primary definitions. These arguments inevitably lead us to a contradiction: an intuitive introduction of a term suggests that its meaning is equally understood by all who use the relevant theory. The concept of consciousness is complex enough already to demand that it expresses itself (I cannot but recall the famous theorem of Gödel's incompleteness of formal systems, which establishes the impossibility of judging the properties of a system by means of the system). At the same time in everyday life, we define the concept clearly enough. We say: “a conscious man” about the individual who understands the nature of his actions and their possible consequences. From this perspective, neither a drunkard, nor a criminal can be called conscious people. Their behavior is contrary to the moral standards of society. Thus, we see that the term “conscious” has a moral and ethical connotation and refers to people who understand and control their behavior in society. At the same time: “an unconscious behavior” s the state when a person acts without controlling his actions and does not understand their consequences. A whole range of states can be between these two extreme situations. One popular option is when a person is aware of all that happened, but acts in a completely unexpected way, both to him and to others. For example, spouses during a family quarrel can say things to each other, for which they will be very embarrassed. In a crowd of fans a man can cry, fight and smash benches, although in real life he is quite a peaceful citizen. Another extreme is the phenomenon of “out of body experience” when a patient being on the operating table under general anesthesia, watches everything that is going on though detached from the event. Thus, to avoid all these difficulties, in modern science it is customary to speak of a “normal” awakened consciousness and various deviations from this state. Thus, the “normal” consciousness is the individual's ability to perceive events and respond in accordance with the level of socio-cultural environment. Hence, is consciousness associated with the level of social development? Yes, of course. For the man of XIII the appearance of a living dragon would be perceived as something natural, though with fear. We can assume that in those times dragons were common wild animals, like wolves or bears. These dragons crawled in those times, and now they preserved only on the island of Komodo. For a modern man the appearance of a dragon will be perceived as a hallucination, or as part of Disneyland. In this context, the above definitions of “consciousness” should not be viewed as an attempt to constructively identify this philosophical category, but as a way to agree on the meaning embedded in the concept. It can be understood as the coordination of intuitive ideas, a sort of “check of the clocks”. To introduce consciousness into scientific framework we need to develop a theory of its operation, which would be able to explain different levels of consciousness and predict some new phenomena, such as distant healing, mediums and out-of-body experiences. Now the most promising seems to be theories based on quantum electrodynamics. We need to accept consciousness as a system effect, depending not on the particular part of the body, even one as powerful as the brain, but on the system as a whole. We may attribute some level of consciousness to every cell of the body or to the particular organ, but to achieve high level of consciousness we need coordinated activity of all the cells, all the organs. Quantum electrodynamics operates with the notion of a system, consisting of many elements, that is why it may be applied to the construction of the theory of consciousness. You may find many papers, published on this topic, and, without being a mathematician, it is absolutely impossible to understand their importance and meaning. Interested readers may refer to the works of Mari Jibu, Kunio Yasue, Emilio Del Giudice, Giuseppe Vitiello and some other prominent theoreticians. Good luck and I praise you if you will be able to understand their content. We may only believe that at some stage they will be able to construct a self-consistent theory of consciousness. I will let you know when it will happen... PDF: WHAT IS CONSCIOUSNESS? Read the full article