#guys can we just abolish him from existence

[allthegothihopgirls]

standing in the mirror, gripping the basin with white knuckles, repeating frantically 'ric grayson isn't real, he can't hurt me'

[qqueenofhades]

Think what strikes me about something like "we can't vote because the system is rigged! Ban the electoral college!" is the big underlying implication of it.

That there is no multiple solutions or paths, only the one correct path and everything else is worthless.

And that's incredibly frustrating because there are two levels of problems with it:

is the utter dismissiveness of anything other than their specific solution, which ignores how any degree of positive change cannot occur with only just ONE idea, it's usually the result of many ideas that lead to change.

The fact that it feels like they're skipping every step in between the current situation to this end result, or actively fixating on themselves having the correct solution, but only by literally getting everything in between completely wrong in the process.

Like, the latter point in particular is like a complex math equation: Just because you got the right answer doesn't mean you can just ignore every difficult step in between, or just assume that all of the WRONG processes become validated retroactively because you stumbled into the correct answer. You'd literally get failed and be forced to redo the problem if you tried that shit in math.

I saw a poll the other day claiming that support for abolishing the Electoral College had now reached 65% of all Americans. Now, I take all polls, whether good or bad, with a grain of salt, but this does reflect a growing awareness that the EC is a horrible racist anti-democratic dinosaur only applied to the presidential election and only used for electing Republicans who don't win the nationwide popular vote, and that there's a genuine groundswell of support to abolish it. See the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which could possibly collect enough state-by-state ratifications to go into effect into 2028 (in the best-case scenario). So even all the bitching about how "the system is rigged" (which. WE KNOW! WE KNOW! There's not a single Democratic voter going to vote like WOW I LOVE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE CAN'T WAIT FOR MY VOTE TO DEPEND ON HOW MUCH IT COUNTS THANKS TO THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE WHEE OLD DEAD WHITE GUYS!) blatantly ignores that a possible seismic change IS possibly in the offing, because people put in the work to make it happen!!! The fact that the EC might soon be superseded or disempowered is FUCKING MONUMENTALLY HUGE!!! It has existed literally since the beginning of America and arbitrated every single presidential election!!! And let me tell you, the people working to make that change and fundamentally reshape American democracy are absolutely not the Online Leftists, whose grasp of civic and political theory starts and ends at "wah the system is rigged I do not vote I am very smart!"

This also reminds me of the recent idiots in my notes complaining that Biden was a) not "genuine" in supporting the striking auto workers, that b) Don't You Know He Broke The Rail Strike (the follow-up where he gave the railworkers what they most wanted with that strike was conveniently never mentioned), or c) that he wasn't "doing it for the right reasons" (whatever the fuck that means). Which accurately reflects their belief that the way you do politics, or praxis, or anything at all, is just by having the Really Goodest Mostest Purest Intentions really hard, and that's it. Like. Aside from the fact that it's impossible to prove why Biden is privately motivated to do anything, we have a long track record demonstrating that he is a person of genuine Catholic faith who has been moving more and more to the left overall, and has been the most pro-union, pro-labor president in American history. So first of all, complaining that "he's not GENUINE!!!!" in supporting the strikers is impossible to prove, and contradicted by actual evidence. But the Online Leftists gotta feel More Gooder Than Him somehow, so.

Likewise: as I said in one of my previous posts about Hillary Clinton: I do not give a fuck if she was privately the most Neoliberal Corporate Centrist Shill Ever To Shill (and as I also said, none of those words means what the Online Leftists think they do). I do not care about the American monarch president's personal feelings, unless they reflect directly on the policy that they make and the real-world effects that it has. I don't care if Clinton killed puppies (or dreamed about killing puppies, which for the thoughtcrime police is equally bad), as long as she appointed 3 new liberal justices to SCOTUS and throughout the courts, instead of the hacks that Trump forced onto the bench and literally everything else he did. In the same vein, Biden could secretly be like "hahahaha fuck all workers BIG CORPORATIONS FOR LYFE but I gotta support the workers and get them their rights so they'll vote 4 meeee" (not that I actually think he is, but still) and hold onto your hankies, children: I DO NOT CARE! Because the tangible real-world effects of that policy that he is working hard on making results in a better economy for those workers and substantial redistribution of capital away from the oligarchs for the first time in a generation! Not to mention, I kind of like the idea that a president decides to make himself most appealing to workers instead of bosses! But for the Online Leftists, if this action isn't done with the Sufficiently Pure Motives, it is Wrong and Bad and Not Good Enough and Blah Blah Biden Sekrit Republican.

Anyway. Yes. That. The end.

[gamebird]

What the hell is it with these people?

Two incidents, same trend/logic and reaction in the other person.

My boyfriend is talking. He says that he is very concerned Trump is going to run for office and win. I agree, this is concerning. He says CO decided Trump couldn't be on the ballot due to the 14th Amendment. I agree I have heard this news and that it is good news. He says that MI decided differently. I agree I have heard this news and that it is bad news. He says it is not possible for Trump to run for re-election and he doesn't know what MI is doing. I say, basically, that the MI judges are interpreting the law. He says there is no interpretation involved. The 14th Amendment forbids running by those who participate in an insurrection and Trump participated in an insurrection. I tell him, 'But that is an interpretation'. He gets angry and says it is not an interpretation, that is what the 14th Amendment says. I say 'no, whether Trump participated. Maybe the MI judges say he just showed up, gave a speech, and then left, and the insurrection happened later and he had nothing to do with it. I disagree, but they could interpret the situation as happening that way.' He gets angry further, that this is invalid, the judges can't decide that, it's not an interpretation. Then he falls silent for a while. Then he says he doesn't want to argue with me. I ... didn't think we were arguing? I say such. He says that no, there are laws and judges can't just decide not to follow them. I say that it really doesn't matter what the laws are, it's who interprets them and what interpretation they want, that's what they'll decide. He says he doesn't want to talk about it. Mutters something about arguing.

A neighbor is talking to me about the HOA. We have a shitty HOA board right now who has brought a lawsuit against a house and done a number of things they aren't legally allowed to do. The neighbor says we must vote out that board and replace it. I agree. She does not want me to run for the board, because I want to abolish the board altogether. I tell her that as long as the HOA exists, it can be used against members. The only way to prevent that is to get rid of it. She says that no, we only need to get rid of the bad people. I say that if she knows that bad people can get in control and do shitty illegal things, then there's nothing to keep that from happening again unless we get rid of the HOA altogether. She tells me that she feels like I'm attacking her and that I need to learn to use softer words. I don't think I'm getting her vote.

It's just weird. I don't think I'm being argumentative or aggressive. I'm pointing out in both cases that you guys can stand there and go on about what's 'right' or 'legal', but it doesn't matter. What matters is that there is a system in place that allows someone to do this thing you're complaining about, and if you can't influence that system (because it's Michigan and we're in Oklahoma; or because you won't vote out the bad board members for fear that someone might be elected who will get rid of the system), then you are going to be subject to the effects of that system.

I'm not saying it's right. It's just how it is.

Eh, anyway, maybe they'll elect me and maybe they won't. Maybe they'll elect Trump and maybe they won't. All I got is my vote.

[nervoustragedyluminary]

Some antisemite barely keeping the mask on/ someone absorbed in their propaganda being pipeline into neonazi shit without realising : "I'm not antisemitic look here's a link to a blog proving he's a Zionist! "

Person In the link :

"this guy is spreading Zionist propaganda and says that Palestinians are Arab colonialists and says to put 'support Israel in your bio

I'm not calling him a Zionist though , also don't trust Jewish people when they talk about antisemitism because that's how the Zionists get you with their propaganda you can't trust Jewish people talking about antisemitism because of the existence of people who say its antisemitic to not support Israels crimes against Palestine "

The screenshots:

don't show that just a collection of Jewish people talking about " wow people are using the I/P" war"as an excuse to be antisemitic and goym are eagerly jumping in and claiming Jewish people are Zionists as an excuse for their antisemitic shit "

Like you're not immune to antisemitic propaganda, nor islamophobic propaganda claiming that Jewish and Palestinians have no mutual goals and are all hivemind enemies of each other and that no Jewish Palestinians exist and that no Jewish non Palestinians have empathy or care for the Palestinian people when a lot of the loudest longest advocates against the apartheid have been Jewish people

"the reason Zionists have gotten as far as they have is that they can use antisemitism as a defence" is pretty antisemitic and erasing the christofacists who want their prophecy to be fulfilled by Palestine being eliminated and are a much larger more powerful majority the world over than Jewish people

"focusing on Jewish suffering alone" is also blatantly false but antisemites never let the truth get in the way of their lies

"Calling out antisemitism is bad and means you support genocide" as the use of these screenshots the op has taken as "evidence of Zionist propaganda" suggest sure is a choice

I mean yeah "pro Israel" looks sus if you divorce it from "it is a call and a reminder that Jews will always survive" context like you can not like the tone but I fail to see"pro Bibi we love genocide" in a message that's basically "hey a bunch of people in the only Jewish country were murdered and taken hostage and we can condemn that and mourn for those lost while also condemning the apartied and genocide of Palestine and mourning for those lost..... but antisemites are using this as an excuse to celebrate and call for all Jewish people in Israel to be genocided and many people seem to be throwing aside their leftism to join in where they see antisemitism as justified"

Like this isn't a sports team thing this is people's lives and families and there very much are antisemites who talk about "abolishing Israel" when what they mean is "kill all the Jewish people in Israel to keep all the Jewish people in the world in line because we've brought into antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish people having all the power and riches and controlling the media"

And you need to realise that and not treat this like it's a freaking soortsball "good team versus the evil jew-i mean ((Zionists))"

Like the OP is literally called fiteclub and seems to behave as if tumblr is a place for "fighting"\ harassment and takes glee in it which is why I had the OP blocked for a while because I got sick of seeing the constant harassing replies to @transmascpetewentz whenever he posted anything...like harassing people on Tumblr isn't activism and doesn't save lives let alone justifying harassment campaigns where people are being told to suicide and people are saying "this specific individual needs to be ended for the good of trans unity uwu but trust me I'm totes against transphobic dogpiles and hate campaigns based on misinfo" it's hypocritical as fuck and the antisemitism and transphobia are transparent as fuck

[traceofexistence]

queer things have been happening in my country lately.

my country is very weird, it is both a progressive and conservative mix, that in one moment you think "wow, that's really cool" and then next you want to fucking slap everyone around.

for example reproductive rights, health care, worker rights etc, all the good stuff, are something that everyone agrees on (well except the church but they can go fuck themselves)

when it comes to gay shit, the younger gens (my age and younger) are all in favour of equal rights etc, the older gens are less accepting, especially the manly men 🙄

on TV gay and trans characters were always played for laughs, yet we have the most decorated and accepted trans woman (she's in her 50s now) huge personality, even songs have been written about her, without misgendering, and since she was a model, she's also very attractive, and that is something not even the most conservative of cis guys can deny. she was the face of women's day at some point, when was still in the public eye, and nobody bat an eyelash.

about 15 years ago, the first gay kiss (between two men) played on TV, it was a late night tv series for audiences 16+ , and it was like a peck. the tv channel at the time was forced to pay huge fines for showing the kiss. (we are talking millions of euros)

about the same time, one of the tv channels bought the rights to the L word. it was supposed to broadcast around 23:00 but they didn't allow it, they extended the late night news so much I remember the reporter trying to find more and more irrelevant news to say. finally at 1:30 they started the first ever episode of the L word, with an 18+ rating, that literally only the porno gets. it stayed on air for exactly 15 minutes until the first commercial break and then it was axed forever.

the past 2-3 years humongous steps have been made towards acceptance. for starters there is finally a civil union allowed for same gender couples. but that also is not exactly equal because adoption is not included.

the entertainment world, started coming out, up until few years ago, everyone was "straight" but now more and more people talk about their sexualities openly.

and the current government is in the process of introducing equal marriage law, they have also abolish some outdated laws, that I didnt even know they existed, they also outlawed conversion therapy.

there is even a political party leader who is openly gay and married his husband. his a total tool, but him being gay so openly, truly shifted the perception of the public.

and just last month the first lesbian kiss in a local made tv series was broadcasted on TV. I was actually shook ! that tv show is also very progressive and queer and everything in between in general. it also showed sex between two men. it has a trans girl, played by a trans girl. it centers a 17 year old girl, who gets pregnant, and her very visibly queer friend helps her get an abortion. while everyone around her tells her that it is a blessing that she got preggo, even though her entire life came to a halt. (it also explores the religious indoctrination that happens here) it also explores acceptance, from parental figures.

and while the conservatives scream and yell, they find little support, and the majority of people, say "if you dont like close your eyes" lol

all in all a very weird atmosphere, which I hope it will shift more positively after the marriage equality becomes law.

[harmcityherald]

I used to queue a song every day at 3pm. it wasn't laborious or anything but I grew out of doing that. I use queue now to schedule posts like its my favorite artist yea happy october birthday only its February so I put it where it belongs. or those wonderful on this day its crab with a knife birthday and such. mostly if you see me posting I am here, present, accountable for all my mistakes. please come tell me about them. You would be surprised how good a listener I am. also if something I post or reblog needs backhanding Im always up for coherent debate. what Im not here for are political attacks, name calling, being a nazi, terf, bigot, you know the list. Im not here to have a dialogue with fascists. you will notice I always say don't be afraid to talk to me if you are a republican. we can have a coherent debate. I don't think all republicans are bad Im literally surrounded by them. just don't be any of the above. nazi, terf, bigot, fascist. hell, you can even be a cop. Im guilty of attacking one kust for being in my notes. I was in the wrong. regular guy just wants to scroll tumblr probably in secret in his patrol car. he didn't deserve what I did and I won't point tto him because that guy deserves to scroll for whatever he likes too. was he a bad cop? how the fuck do I know? I was in a bad place at the time anyway and his likes triggered my paranoia. look, I tried to be a cop. I know some cops who are good guys. not all cops are bad like not all women are bad drivers just to use a worn out analogy. you can posture as if you are king shit antifa and acab all day but Im here to tell you when I have had to call them I am thankful they are there. call me a bootlicker if that makes your dick hard but Im here to tell you I been a fucking rebel since around 73. that's when my angst started. The best rebels don't hide from police. my rebellion is in my VOTE. now having said all that I truly believe that the police were instructed by 'higher ups' to cause the ferver of the blm riots. it was an election cycle and boy did they show their asses. Im not saying the anger at lets say the death of George Floyd was misplaced in any way. what I am saying is after Trayvon Martin I could almost see a effort to intentionally stir up these things. So I may be right or wrong about that, its not my place to say. but it is my place to wonder and to always try to think critically always. 18 year old me wanted to be a cop. I wanted to be on the brand spanking new profilers unit of the fbi. I wanted to take serial killers off the street. you can thank my great uncle for implanting that desire. They put him to death and 13 year old me said I will pull that lever myself. So I can never believe that all cops are bastards. there was me and there was Serpico. blows your little catch phrase up. same with the defund the police bit. ok maybe they don't need 30,000$ robot dogs. I get it. we should fund better things. I get all of that. But.....you take away the police force and 6 dudes on the block break down your door for whatever it is they gonna kill you for, you really think you and your ar15 are all you'll need. trust me, it ain't. some of you all want the 24/7 purge going on. what we've needed from way back is POLICE REFORM. not abolishment. and thats where I fall on that spectrum. police brutality? oh it absolutely exists in great numbers. I will even give you that most police are corrupt in some way. shit there may only be one guy on any given force that is a real on the level good cop. we need to train them more. pay them more and hold them accountable more. thats a long way off with a supreme court packed with nazis. and I mean that from the bottom of my heart. its packed with nazis. you guys think im crazy but look at the other side of the world and nazis fighting there and everywhere. they call themselves many things, the media calls them 'far right' my dude they are fucking nazis.

wait a minute. how did I go from my queue to fuck nazis in 7 seconds flat?

anyway you may not agree with me on a lot. Here I am.

[ignitification]

What the Future Holds

“It is the temptation of war to punish; it is the task of policy to construct.” (Henry Kissinger). 

There has been a lot of debate around what is going to happen after (the heroes win? AfO is defeated? The Villains are saved? - are all valid hypothesis), right at the end of BNHA. Long ago, though, someone asked - what would be the reaction of the civilians at large when this all goes down? We know for a fact that while, more or less, our protagonists are in the loop of what exactly went down with the villains (or at least that they have not had a lot of positive experiences and possibilities to grow up as good as them), the civilians know close to nothing (apart from Touya’s broadcast, which in hindsight should be at least enough to make space way for the possibility of civilians understanding the woes of the villains and trying to accept the change which this ending will brings, and yet) when it comes to this matter. Will they be able to accept ‘a hero’ saving ‘a villain’? Will the change in society, the abolishment of a Quirk Society in general and the aftermath of the war (likely the cancellation of the hero rankings, and just the demotion of the title hero as profession) be accepted eventually?

While these are question to which I would like to answer ‘It depends’, I’d say that it might be the case, but the change will be slow, gradual and likely painful. Let’s take the example of Heteromorph Quirks, which, so many years after the discovery and establishment of quirks, are still looked down upon. This highlights the struggle with which this society adapts, and that it adapts to only certain parts of the society (which are usually the pretty parts, while the ugly ones are or ignored or just thoroughly refused to look at). It is the same principle we see in not only the narrative of Lady Nagant (and the rose-colored glasses with which civilians see society and pro-heroes), and the villains themselves (as their Quirks made them unfit for the general public to be displayed or used) but also in the same narrative which Izuku carries - he struggles to accept himself as someone who is Quirkless, and takes his chances to inherit All Might’s power, a little because of his dreams and more because that way he can also be part of that same society who treated him like shoe’s dirt before he gained ‘power’ and a standing as a UA student with a Quirk fit to be a hero.

We can see and take a little bit from what is probably going to be the reaction to the ending, both by seeing the reaction we have to Dabi’s broadcast, the press conference of the Top 3 and Izuku going rogue and looking villainy, as well as the public’s reaction to him coming back to UA.

Being likely familiar with these scenario, it definitely does not hit as a positive-filled situation, but rather the outage of the small mindedness and the expectancy of a perfect world division in villains and heroes by the civilians. Yes, it is the famous panel of the dichotomy of heroes and villains and look who already did foresee this so long ago: a villain, which is hilarious in itself but also pretty logical if you think about it.

The thing is, that as told millions times before the core problem of this society is that it does not understand nuance (and so doesn’t this fandom, for that matter): everything should be white or black, good or bad, hero or villain. But in reality, this dichotomy falls short of understanding what is hidden behind the curtain: the ugly truth of the fact that sometimes there is no good or bad, and that maybe sometimes the good is not as good and bad is not as bad. And as said million times before again, this stems from the fact that a. society has been kept in the dark from the deeds that the HPSC has done all these years, therefore conditioning and manipulating society into believing that a distinction exists; and b. it is rather easier to separate the good and the bad guys by a simple principles like a working label and to stick to it, even in front of rather compelling evidence. In the end, it is clear that the public has trust issues at their finest, but it then shows what a shaky base these society has been built on: a rather fine balance, which has been topped over once the castle of cards has been knocked down. 

It is in the hands of the new generation then, to attempt and change how thing have been so far. Retributive justice, just like in the quote above, is always tempting - and it is no brainer that it will be likely very hard for the civilian to accept whatever is thrown at them in the end, which does not involve the imprisonment and therefore the punishment of the villains. But at the same time, it is also true, that slowly but steadily things are staring to look up: we have Shouto who wants to save his brother, and Izuku who instead is trying to understand the villains and why they become such, stemming from his will to understand and help Shigaraki. After all, their main power is to change things up: a change which, hilariously, can be seen concretely by Bakugou’s words in chapter 323. Bakugou, who is a byproduct of that same society, is admitting his faults and the fact that it happens at this moment is likely a foreshadow for a major scale change: after all, the entire society owes an apology to the villains, big time. It is not a case then, that the narrative is putting everything to its places and showing us the before, and the tough process of change and the consequences of it. In this scenario, Izuku, Shouto, Bakugou, Ochako and generally the UA kids play the role of policymakers: they are looking in the future, trying to get an overview of the situation which they know as true and the one the villains consider as true and then trying to do ‘the right thing’: unfortunately, there is never a right thing when it comes to these matters, and no shoe-fits-all solution. It will therefore be interesting how exactly things will play out and whether society (in a not so distant future) might accept the fact that the villains can be victims, and in search for the satisfaction of that same retributive justice they are trying to enforce on them. In my opinion, the effort made by the young generation in this matter will be crucial: some people will refuse to accept such a thing (blaming the villains for everything that went wrong since day 1), other will struggle with accepting it and likely will remain neutral (which, in hindsight, is even worse as it is somehow similar to the civilians that thoroughly ignored Tenko when we was clocharding of the streets) and the who begrudgingly might accept the fact that exactly like Dabi said, pro-heroes are not always heroes in private too and they have as much harm potential as villains, it just does not get publicly displayed. And maybe, slowly, society will come to the consensus that while not always the case, offering a hand to those who struggle, might save a life - and why not, maybe at one point they will stop classifying people as ‘heroes and villains’, and instead accept themselves as humans altogether. But such is the human struggle: lost in the will to put a label on things, and forgetting that unlike labels, humans have the infinite capacity to grow, expand and change.

[7ven-devils]

A really long overanlysis of minecraft servers.

This will be my only warning, this shit is really long.

I promised this to @ivi-prism 2 weeks ago (hi, i am Svetla) but university said no and then i feel my notes were incomplete so i have to do more research.

So let's talk about anarchism and capitalism. As a future political scientist, really bugs me how the fandom and some content creators (im looking at you techno) misinterpret both theories.

Yeah this will be a overanalysis about the political, social and economic system of two minecraft servers. Why? Cause i like analysis things like this and finally i can solved what is the system of hermitcraft and thats make me happy.

Things to consider:

First im not native english speaker and im lazy so im not often write or talk in english so my typos can make Doc really proud.

Second i don't watch Dsmp i only know things about the server by the animatics, the constant information wich pop up here on tumblr, the crossover fanfics and the tiny vods that youtube insist play when i have activate automatic reproduction.

Third i tried to simplified this much as i can because this analysis i maded talking with my friends (also political scientists) and a former professor, so it got quite technical while i was writing it.

And finally don't take this seriously, I'm not trying to insult anyone, I only started this because the hermitfandom started saying that hermitcraft was capitalist and then everyone started comparing the Dsmp with hermitcraft saying anarchism vs capitalism, that's why the dsmp entered into this analysis.

Guys, seriously chaos isn't anarchism and "sucefully economic" isn't capitalism, even paid with "money" (diamonds in this case) isnt necessary capitalism.

First, mini glossary:

I understand a server like a Society/State (country) with Mr Weber definition. In really vague words a State is anyone that has a territory and has legal control of violence (the laws, no the abuse of authority).

I understand the private property as the hermits bases and/or shops (i suppose only base in dsmp? Idk)

I understand the mass production as the farms and resources.

Capitalism is a economic, politic and social theory, wich it considers private property essential and tends to monopolize the resources 'cause this it also considered private property.

Anarchy means "without government" it has its origin in the Ancient Greece. And Anarchism theory is just a society free from any political authority, but respecting the liberties of the others.

A Failed State is which one lose control of the legal violence, and can't provide the peace, essential human rights and the basics for a normal lifestyle to its people.

I think thats all the bored shit (i hope so). Now the interesting shit.

Why hermitcraft isnt capitalist?

Short answer, their idea of private property is not the same as capitalism has.

Long answer, even if they have their own stuff, they had a really strong sense of community and dont really care if someone take things from them.

We can see this in the beginning of season when Iskall take some mini blocks from Etho and he didn't really care (yeah, iskall "paid" him, but later i will explain this) or the multiple times Grian "borrow" things from Iskall and Mumbo in season 6 or Scar in season 7, the team ZIT constantly take things from each other and i can go on and on with examples, but the point here is this couldn't happen if they had a capitalist society because this would break the "private" part of private property and mass production.

Basically their friendship made so strong their sense of community that they are basically inmune to capitalism, Uncle Marx would be proud of them (not really, but would be funny). So they are communist? Nope, communist don't believe in private property and the hermits does.

But you just said-? I said they dont has the SAME idea of private property as capitalism does. They still have their bases, farms and shops, but for them their private property isnt sacred like in a capitalism system would be.

They're respect each other things because they appreciated the effort and values the time the person puts on their buildings and not only because doesn't belongs to them (and obviously cause theyre frends, but shush, this is a overanalysis, the obvious things doesn't have place here) i mean even for the shenanigans they are really polite and try to cause the least damage possible not because is not of them but because they valued the person.

Basically the famous honor code of hermitcraft.

What about the economic system and the shopping district?

Lets talk about the elephant in the room.

If Hermitcraft isnt a capitalist system, why they have a economic system based in diamonds?

Well, despite the exchange based in money for resources or services is a principal characteristic of capitalism, it isnt exclusive of that theory.

The money is a social consensus, cause barter has becomes obsolete and gold isnt cheap or infinite to use as payment. And basically, this is why we use money on this days (if you want to know the history of money ask to your trusted historian or Wikipedia).

What does this remind us? Yep, diamonds and iou's are a consensus too. When the 1.16 came out some hermits tried to change to netherite as payment and didn't suit, so they ignored it and continued with their current payment system.

And as much as Mr Smith likes to say that this is how the free market (and his stupid invisible hand) works, capitalism needs the monopoly of resources and people who works to pay for those resources.

But in Hermitcraft nobody really controlled the resources, anyone can go and collect their materials or made a farm. They just decided don't do it and go and buy it, because they save the time to go and collect for themselves, in other words they paid for the time.

Various hermits say they saved so much time go and buy the materials instead to collect themself or trade with the villagers (cause theyre the worst and all of us know it) thats why the barge and lookie lookie at my bookie are so profitable.

The shopping district it wasn't a thing before season 4, i dont really sure how it worked before, because i started watch in season six and sadly i have a boring adult life to saw the old seasons, but i assume it works in the same way that the trades the hermits does between them to accord a discount or a collab, and speak directly with the interested hermit or directly take it and pays what's considered it was fair, like iskall did with etho.

Like i said all what's happen in hermitcraft is a consensus, even the shopping district.

So yeah, that isnt a thing that would happen in a capitalism system, probably you would be dead, because "how are you dare to entered to my property", or in the jail, "because thats not yours".

So, what is hermitcraft?

For the surprise from much of you, Hermitcraft has an anarchist system.

What?! But their server is so peaceful, they don't steal from each other, they doesn't griefing, hows that possible?!

Well, the anarchism isn't really a violent political theory, at least in its beginning, actually anarchism is one of the most peaceful theories i studied, thats why i dont really thing it will worked in our society, but work in a server of 24 friends. Its too idealist.

I don't really study all of the thoughts corrents of anarchism because they are a lot. But the one we are interested is one of original thought corrent, The Mutualism, this in contrast with their cousin Communism doesn't believes the private property was something bad and considered like one of the rights from the individual, but different as capitalism because like i said before it wasn't sacred and communal things will exist to help others to start or recover.

Proudhon, one of it intellectuals, considered not paid for the work of the other it was a form to violate their liberties and feel horrofied with Marx when he said we have to abolish the private property.

The mutualists believes that each person should possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, and the products obtained would be trade in the market for the amount equivalent of their work.

This sound familiar, isnt it? Hermitcraft works in this way.

The thing with anarchism is they don't believes in a government over the people. And the hermits doesn't have one, yeah there's Scar being the mayor, but he isnt have a power over the rest and only is in charge of the "cowmercial district" even aquatown isn't part of his jurisdiction, his function is more of organization, like when we put a friend in charge to organizing part of a roadtrip.

It's the same with Xisuma figure, we all put him in a position of the admin of hermitcraft, but the truth is he isnt the only one with admin commands (but apparently some or all of them losed their admin status, at least in one of the last tango's streams, he hasnt it anymore) and various hermits said that he is more like an ambassador of them in the legal things of the server.

The hermits take all of they decisions in group and in the majority of things all of them needs to be agreed with the decision or they simple doesn't do it. And this is a characteristic of the mutualism because for them anyone are over the other.

And if you aren't already bored at this point and you put attention to what i wrote of the concept of private property in the mutualism, you would see it is practically the way hermitcraft works. They make their bases and farms, recolect resources and sell what they don't will use, buy mostly to save time and paid for the price what they considered fair. Yeah i know sometimes they do some farm specifically for one shop, but this is more "yeah, this is my thing" (Tango and Iron; Ren and wood) or a division of activities "if you do that, i do this".

The perfect utopia.

What about the Dsmp?

If you do it to here, congratulations.

So what about the Dsmp, i entered here because i want to read of them and the only thing i read was about hermitcraft.

Well, the Dsmp only entered in the equation because much of you said they were an anarchist server, but i see it more like a "failed state" and when i was talked with an exprofessor he agreed with me.

I know the term of failed state is controversial and is almost obsolete, but is the best way to describe the server and stop said it is anarchist.

So why failed state and not an anarchist state? Because they have a government (or apparently multiples) a failed one, but is there, if it were an anarchist server wouldn't have one.

Usually the failed states are known for being violent and volatile places in which ones their governments can't provides the basics to their people to live, normally are places with ethnics conflicts, civil wars, authoritarian governments or states in wars. The most common examples are Haití, Somalia or Syria.

And i am sure you can see the similarities with the Dsmp, so yeah, theyre chaotic but not anarchist.

The wars ruined the stability from the server, have a multiple sides and a megalomaniac for admin, but the goverment still there and they are fighting for the power wich wouldn't happen if the server were anarchist because anarchism don't believe the power should be possess for someone.

The server simply is failed state wich struggles under a violent fight for power.

--------------------------------------------------

If you read this far, you're a hero and had my gratitude for read my useless thoughts. Maybe some day i do it other overanalysis of this servers. I hope you enjoyed and dont confused so much.

Thanks for read.

And if there are some angry economist with me for "misrepresent" the capitalist i am completely open to a debate, my only condition is it would be in chilean spanish ;)

[sepublic]

Barrel’s Warhammer!

           YYYYOOOOOO SASHA!!!!

           She really is the epitome, the pinnacle, of gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss! I love Sasha, she’s such an utter mess, morally ambiguous and then downright terrible in so many ways, and genuinely unhinged in just as many! She’s a freaking riot and SUCH an amazing character, y’all!

           In general, I adore how Toads are handled in this show! Yeah, they’re big and brutish and used as thugs… But the show still clearly portrays them as people, and some of them are terrible like Bog, but others are just trying to live their lives, like Percy and Braddock! And how they’re all clearly working with this ascribed role as Andrias’ enforcers and iron fist across Amphibia, how they’re encouraged to be cruel brutes… But they’re still people and they’re still oppressed, which is why Grime is leading his rebellion! Good for him, good for THEM!

           Also… GRIMMITY?!?! Beatrix?! Grime LORE! I like how Beatrix and Grime have blind eyes on opposite sides, and Sasha roasting Bufo by naturally connecting his name to Buffoon, WONDERFUL! Aldo’s also a legendary, killer design, he reminds me of VLD Zarkon, old and decrepit and fanged and clearly has seen a LOT of stuff, a real warrior of his time… Honestly, getting a look into the Toads and THEIR complicated role in this story, as the ‘bad guys’ but not really, there’s more to them; It’s such a fit to Sasha’s character, and I LOVE how she’s such an utter brute for someone who normally seems accustomed to using honey over vinegar to attract flies (to feed her Toads)! She’s nuts, she’s great.

           I love the explanation for the eye symbol, I love Sasha really getting to appreciate Percy and Braddock, and for a moment I thought she really was learning her lesson… When she gave them an out, I thought maybe she took what happened with Anne to heart, but now…! Maybe this is what she’s always done; Made empty promises. God, I love this little arc for her character, how she wants to be a good friend, but she keeps valuing power and control over all else…

           AND HER RAGE! HER JEALOUSY! At Anne and Marcy being with each other, leaving her out, Sasha’s mind jumping to all of the worst conclusions, and how THAT anger is what unlocks her gem power, not heroism or anything else! Sasha’s such a complex and messed-up character but you can’t help but root for her, she really IS a Problematic Fave! God, with how she’s going to meet Anne in a volcano, and the whole “Sasha is Anakin and Anne is Obi-Wan” just WRITES itself, with Sasha angrily accusing Anne of turning Marcy against her, Anne retorting that Sasha did that herself, etc.!

           God Sasha’s such a complicated mess and ball of unresolved emotions and contradictions, denial that’s insisting everything’s fine when it’s really not… She’s a manipulator who prefers to be hands-off, yet is also somehow the raw brute with unthinking, unyielding strength! She’s utterly terrifying, no wonder all of the Toads are in awe of her ferocity and power!

           Also, I like how Barrel’s Warhammer was included; At first I wondered WHY the Narwhal Worm would guard the weapon used by the Toad who fought it, but as we can clearly see… Barrel must’ve conked it out BADLY with his Warhammer, knocking it out, and the hammer has been stuck since! And once more, the hammer has been slammed into the worm… And in general, I love seeing the Toads just ROOT around Sasha and Grime, I love seeing villainous characters get to go feral and unhinged as you root for them, as THEY rise up and fight against all odds as the underdogs!

           Percy and Braddock and the gag with the kawaii poses was great, but it’s also sad to see them go! They’re definitely a wake-up call for Sasha and I like it, I wonder if you could parallel them, one-by-one, to Anne and Marcy respectively? Perhaps Anne and Marcy were initially not taken seriously by Sasha at first, but ultimately she DID grow to care for them and not just as ‘tools’, who knows? With Anne and Percy and Braddock, I think Sasha’s going to have to reconsider things… And GRIME, how he just sort of accepts that, yeah, you gotta lose people to achieve a goal! I could see him being a bad influence to Sasha, unintentionally- Like her, he means well, they’re really great parallels to one another!

           Like, Sasha and Grime are both brutes, power-hungry, and wanting control, but Sasha prefers subtlety and manipulation, appeals to both her and others’ emotions, while Grime prefers to be raw and unthinking strength, he’s a seasoned veteran from combat, while Sasha is likely a rich kid, young and learning… They’re such a dynamic duo with a lot to teach one another! Maybe Grime sees himself in Sasha; Himself when HE was a kid… Maybe when he was a gladiator, he had friends but left them behind to be promoted to Captain? I wonder if Beatrix has anything to say on this, too…

           Could Beatrix provide insight to Grimmity? Did Grime leave her behind in a sense…? Does SASHA have a sibling, and that leads to her weird power complex, as another parallel to Grime! Either way it’s sweet, I adore the dynamic of two horrible people who are good friends and bad, enabling influences to each other… Being problematic faves, you can’t help but cringe at their mistakes but also cheer as they win as underdogs and turn the tables on their enemies! I like how Sasha is still supportive of Grime and vice-versa, Grime’s guiding this kid, but Sasha’s fully supporting Grime as the de-facto leader and backing him up, not trying to seize control!

           I think it really parallels Anne, how she just wanted to get back home… But somewhere along the way, she realizes how much she loves and enjoys this, and values her friend! And maybe it could lead to Sasha not wanting to head back home after all, especially if there’s nothing there for her; Which could play into her keeping all of her gem powers as she opposes Andrias openly, while Anne has some of her power because again, she’s more neutral, and then Marcy has none because she’s fully bought into the Newt King’s schtick!

           Also, it’s funny that Sasha is no doubt feeling betrayed, like her trust has been jeopardized by Anne and Marcy, considering she did the same to Anne in Reunion! Lying to her about what she intended to do with the Frogs… It’s wonderfully hypocritical and this kid does NOT want self-awareness, she’ll toy with it for a bit, but then immediately backpedal! Get better and well Sasha, for everyone’s sake… The confrontation and paranoia as she loses her friends and only has Grime, who means well but isn’t so great himself, is also nice!

           Honestly, there’s even a parallel to the idea of Sasha meaning well, only to be ruined by her own toxicity… And Grime wanting a better life for Toads in his revolution, but still allowing a hierarchy to exist by the end of the day, instead of abolishing it for all! They both have good ideas and initiative, but it’s ruined by Sasha and Grime not backing down on certain things and not listening to others, being SO sure they’re right… Very compelling stuff. Now I’m starting to wonder if Sasha will be open to Anne about her suspicions, if they WILL get along for the Third Temple…

           …Or if she’ll try to manipulate and fool her again, thinking that SHE’s been betrayed herself! And maybe Sasha will realize her faults in the battle of Newtopia, only for it to be too late, Anne has been too betrayed, Sasha has only herself (and, well, Andrias) to blame! In the meantime, as Sasha no doubt embraces her role as a rebel, but also unknowingly as a hero against Andrias and his master… I can see her tapping more into her gem powers and actually using them as part of her rage, hence the shots we see from the Third Temple! She’s going to be terrifying, y’all, and even more of a match for Yunnan at this point… And Anne, poor Anne’s going to be caught between TWO toxic friends!

           Both mean well, but both have other bad points… And it just means Anne’s gonna have to forge her own path, make her own decisions and group and faction, be her own person and take initiative once more! But it’s also gonna be lonely and could contribute to more trust issues along the way… And maybe she’ll think she can only trust herself, only do things on her own, and how this might pair badly with her selfless martyr-complex. We’ll have to wait and see, though… We’ll have to wait and see.

[ladyonfire28]

Adèle Haenel: "And the fight against racism, is that a black thing?" (March 1, 2016)

Her raw talent and her unique personality are shaking up French cinema. With two Césars in her pocket, the actress from Les Combattants became an icon of auteur cinema in Les Ogres and soon with the Dardenne brothers. Interview with a thoughtful and shady feminist.

The first vision we have of Adèle Haenel when we enter the hotel room, where she has just been photographed, is that of a tall girl in denim and worn-out suede boots looking for cotton to remove her make-up. She says that it's too much, that it's not her, that we have to take it all away - this sticky femininity - and right away.

She announces her color: strong, fierce, temperamental, a little prickly, when, during the interview, she frowns and throws your questions back to you - always with great relevance. She is beautiful and abrupt, her adolescent brusqueness (even though she is 27 years old), gives the impression of robustness: a sportswoman with the shoulders of a swimmer but the face of a femme fatale from the inter-war period, green eyes and a pulpy mouth. This is an unprecedented combination in French cinema, which tends to be dominated by young first-time coquettes looking for contracts with luxury brands. We have never seen Adèle H. at the front row of fashion shows, her appearances on the red carpet - the playground of her fellow female cast members - did not stick in our memories, and that's good.

We've been keeping an eye on her since Water Lilies (2007), by Céline Sciamma, to whom she declared her love at a César Award ceremony. She won two of them, hands down: for Suzanne, and then, last year, for Les Combattants, an emblematic film that created a new image of a virile heroine in French cinema. Adèle Haenel, an icon of auteur cinema, was thrown at the heart of the system: she is the most coveted actress of the moment and has just finished in Liège The Unknown Girl, by the Dardenne brothers, who will inevitably be screened again at the next Cannes Film Festival.

You have to hear her talk about cinema, with her eyes fixed and uninterrupted flow, to understand how incandescent this girl is. In Les Ogres, a choral film by Léa Fehner that talks about the daily life of an itinerant theater that performs Chekhov, she plays Mona, actress and pregnant. The diary of this tribe that travels from city to city, a tent on their back, also draws a universal portrait of actors, truculent monsters full of love and violence.

Madame Figaro - Since the success of Les Combattants, you intrigue people...

Adèle Haenel. - I can see that the demand is stronger, but I'm not chasing after advertising and I don't intend to invade the public space. I think we have to remain discreet. Notoriety hasn't changed anything in my life and it certainly won't change my desire to make films following the same line.

What is that line ?

I make a film to carry a message. I can feel when a director has something to say. I feel something, a desire, a vibration. There is a thread, an intuition, a truth that imposes itself on me. I know what I have to do, I can feel it. It is both mystical and very rational. What is interesting is to come out of a navel-gazing, to rise up, to talk about people, to talk about the world. I like the idea that everything fits together collectively: feelings, economics, politics. A film is a common story, and I want to be part of that dialogue. A film must be in direct resonance with its time: cinema is today. I do things for now, and it's not up to me, to us, to decide whether a film is going to stay, whether it's made for eternity. I feel extremely responsible.

You feel very inhabited when you talk about cinema...

I have many other reasons to live, but, yes, I am deeply interested in the representation of things. How does cinema fit into society? Who is it for? Cinema is obviously a political act. For example, even the latest Star Wars is political. I was really relieved to see so many women and different skin colors: it means that everyone can be a hero and that feels good.

It is said that in the movies women are taking over...

It's an evergreen content. They make a big deal out of it, but if you look at the numbers, it's not so true: women are still in the minority. I can't be satisfied with that.

Do you feel the prevailing machismo that is associated with cinema?

I'm not going to waste my time and energy educating these people.

Is it easier to succeed in this job when you are a man?

Your question is a strange one. Either we point out superficial phenomena - the decision-makers are men, they have the money and therefore the power - or we debate a broader question: in what world are we evolving? And there, it's always the same thing.  The world is cut in two: on the one hand, there is the man, the virile, all linked to superior qualities, and on the other hand, the lower part, the woman, the secret, the moods. Of course, all our representation is linked to this division. I often ask myself the following question: in a fair world, without discrimination, what is art? Art today is in dialogue with its time, so it does not abolish anything but is involved in the fight.

As we can't classify you, you have been labeled as virile...

I'd like someone to explain to me why people should always be defined. To be a woman, you would have to be a feminine woman, right? For me, it's redundant. I don't maintain any posture, I am myself. But the way people look at me doesn't bother me: make up your mind, there's no problem.

However, you embody a renewal at the antipodes of actresses on their first red carpets...

I don't know which ones you are talking about, but I will never be against other propositions from women. After all, they also are undoubtedly dealing with their inner truth. But then again, I don't want to comment on something that escapes me completely: the gaze of others. I realize that everything is complicated for actresses who are so solicited that they end up participating, willingly or unwillingly, in a kind of general cacophony.

Are you one of those ogresses that Léa Fehner describes in her film?

I've just eaten about twenty-five croissants, isn't that a clue? In Léa's film, there is an energy close to the one in Les Combattants: action as a solution to an era in crisis. Here, it's laughter and gluttony facing a personal anxiety and an era that values suffering. I think we need to wake people up, to make them understand that fatality is a terrible and disarming discourse. We are told that the planet is warming up, that people are being massacred, that entire populations are on the move. I am not saying that we are not powerless against this, but feeling concerned and responsible is already a first step towards action.

Are actors monsters?

I don't know and I don't care. I'm not here to tell people: I'm like this, I'm like that, I'm better than you. I don't have to deal with that. Why me? I don't know.

Yes, why you and not someone else? Actor, it's an elective profession...

What is an actor? Their hypersensitivity should not be overestimated. The key is courage. That's the most difficult thing, courage and sincerity: not hiding, committing yourself with what you have, with your face and your body, with everything, with no escape. We often say: "To be an actor is to be someone else" but above all, you have to accept being yourself. It's not the most well-balanced job on earth, but a healthy actor would be weird, wouldn't it?

Precisely, you are sometimes compared to... Depardieu.

There are worse critics. What I like about him is his poetic sensitivity, which is not fake at all. You can sense his love of texts. And then, come on, what an incredible freedom of acting!

Can you play everything?

I don't know. What I do know is that the feeling of comfort is dangerous. It would turn us into a small factory. As soon as I start a film, I don't sleep anymore. The first scenes are hell.

Is shooting naked a problem?

It annoys me. In all films, there's this double injunction from society or the audience: we actresses are asked to get naked but to feel guilty about it! But no guys, I'm not going to feel guilty so you can be fully satisfied that I hold this assigned place of the whore and the well-bred girl! The commitment I make when I make a movie is much bigger than that.

Your feminist side...

I don't have a feminist side, I'm a feminist simply because I want to exist.

Today, not all women are feminists…

So feminism is a girl thing, then? And the fight against racism is a black thing? It's not a power struggle or lobbying, it's not Pepsi against Coke. No, it's a fundamental question about humanity.

[rhys-rambles]

FIGHT CLUB | 1999

I was introduced to the movie Fight Club around 3 years ago. It wasn’t until recently I’ve become interested in it. So here’s my Fight Club breakdown :) WARNING FOR SPOILERS!!

For those who don’t know, Fight Club is a cult favorite novel that was later adapted into a film released in 1999, directed by David Fincher. Starring Brad Pitt, Edward Norton, and Helena Bonham Carter.

The story of Fight Club revolves around three main characters. It’s told from a first-person perspective by a nameless character that’s commonly called ‘the narrator’, who has a dead-end white-collar job at a major car company and has fallen prey to what he calls the ‘Ikea-nesting instinct’. Dictated by social norms he walks perfectly in line like a docile sheep, which translates into an inauthentic, repetitive and empty life.

He suffers from a bad case of insomnia, which causes him to be neither fully awake, nor fully asleep. Sometimes, he entertains self-destructive thoughts: as he flies around from state to state for his job, he prays for a crash or mid-air collision every time the plane bankes too sharply on takeoff or landing.

During a flight, he meets an eccentric and hypermasculine character named Tyler Durden.

Tyler seems to be the direct opposite of the narrator. He’s a wolf rather than a sheep, disentangled from society, and impervious to social norms. He takes what he wants, without asking, and whenever he pleases. He’s self-sufficient, has no superiors, and doesn’t care about material possessions.

The movie later reveals that Tyler and the narrator are the same person, as Tyler is a product of the narrator’s imagination, that’s probably induced by severe insomnia combined with dissatisfaction with a dull, meaningless existence and a lifetime of repressed urges.

The narrator is addicted to going to support groups for specific illnesses because these give him the opportunity to cry, which seems to be a remedy for his insomnia. The downside of his behavior is that he isn’t genuine; he has no testicular cancer, or blood parasites, yet acts as if he does, so he can reap the benefits of these sessions.

But these benefits come to an end when another non-genuine visitor starts to join the sessions as well. This is a woman named Marla Singer, and her motive for joining these sessions is, and I quote: “It’s cheaper than a movie and there’s free coffee.”

Marla is a self-destructive, chain-smoking fatalist, who’s expecting to die at any moment, but finds it tragic that it never happens. She steals food and clothes for a living and attempts suicide by overdosing Xanax.

Even though the narrator, Tyler, and Marla are totally different personalities, they all live their lives accompanied by a nihilistic undercurrent.

Tyler seems to have figured out what causes this emptiness, and during the course of the story, his solution unfolds. Unfortunately, his character slides from a sage-like father figure to an anarchist terrorist, who’s out to destroy modern civilization. Nevertheless, he exposes a series of harsh realities about modern life that are worth contemplating.

Anti-consumerism

The anti-consumerist stance of Tyler Durden becomes obvious when he verbalizes his concern about the modern way of life. Shortly after the narrator meets Tyler, he discovers that his apartment went up in flames. After this unfortunate event, realizing that he has no friends to call, he calls Tyler. The two meet, and the narrator complains about losing his furniture, and his respectable and almost complete wardrobe. Tyler responds rather indifferently and slightly sarcastically before he begins to express his views on the matter. Quote:

“We’re consumers. We are by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty, these things don’t concern me. What concerns me are celebrity magazines, television with 500 channels, some guy’s name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra…”

It becomes clear that Tyler has quite an unconventional view of what’s good and bad. Murder, crime, and poverty are generally considered bad things, while consumer goods like televisions, clothing from a certain brand, products that help to hide aging, enhance bedroom performance, and help us with weight loss, are considered preferable.

Tyler has a contempt for the artificial, as opposed to elements that have been a natural part of the human condition, probably as long we exist. This way of thinking touches upon an ancient Cynic philosopher named Diogenes of Sinope, who believed that modern, civilized life hinders our natural state.

At the end of the movie, it appears that the narrator has destroyed his apartment himself when he was taken over by his alter ego, Tyler Durden. This deed was the first step onto the road of detachment from his property, into a more authentic way of life and to (how Tyler puts it): “reject the basic assumptions of civilization, especially the importance of material possessions.”

The narrator moves in with Tyler, who lives in a dilapidated house with ongoing leaks, power failures, and no Ikea furniture. Slowly but surely, the narrator indeed detaches from his previously destroyed property. “Things you own end up owning you,” Tyler tells him. And this simple piece of wisdom probably hits home, when the narrator realizes that he doesn’t need all these worldly goods, and is actually much happier without them.

Non-conformity

Tyler Durden is a non-conformist, and shows, again, similarities with Diogenes, who not only purposefully lived in poverty, but also rejected social norms. For him, social constructs are nothing more than a superficial layer of culture that represses our true nature.

Diogenes lived in a barrel, Tyler lives in an abandoned building. Diogenes urinated in public, Tyler urinates in the soup of a restaurant.

The narrator, on the other hand, seems to be the embodiment of conformity, as he adapts his lifestyle completely to societal expectations. The problem with this behavior is that we dedicate our existence walking the paths that people other than ourselves have laid out for us. This need to conform, the fear of falling by the wayside, this sickly preoccupation by what others think of us, this necessity to keep up with the Joneses: what an exhausting way of life, just to feel ‘accepted’.

So, what if we stop caring? What if we reject the generally accepted norms, and choose our own values, elect our own leaders, determine our own goals, regardless of the social expectations? This is a fundamental difference between the narrator and Tyler Durden, who puts it like this: “I am free in all the ways that you are not.”

Ironically, later on in the story, Project Mayhem, a terrorist organization led by Tyler that grows out of Fight Club, is a textbook example of conformity, as it’s members wear the same clothes, are absolutely equal, abolish their names, and are referred to as space monkeys that sacrifice their lives for a greater cause. We could say that by rejecting one doctrine in order to be ‘non-conformist’, we often imprison ourselves in another one.

Fighting and masculinity

Fighting and the experience of pain play a significant role in Fight Club. At the beginning of the story, Tyler asks the narrator to hit him as hard as he can. He explains his strange wish by saying: “How can you know yourself if you’ve never been in a fight? I don’t want to die without any scars.”

So, the narrator hits him. Tyler hits him back, and the two engage in a fistfight. Both seem to feel surprisingly pleasant afterward and decide to do it again. Their nightly activities on a parking lot attract the attention of other men, that are also interested in joining these non-hostile fistfights. And thus, Fight Club is born.

It’s widely known that voluntary exposure to certain forms of pain makes us stronger in the face of adversity, which could be a legit reason to partake in these fights. As the narrator states: “After fighting everything else in your life got the volume turned down.”

However, Fight Club is more than just a metaphor for dealing with hardship through exposure: a physical fight, and the violence and aggression that goes with it, resonates with the primal part of our being.

Not only the men in the story are attracted to the violence of fighting; Fight Club as a movie and novel was so impactful on its audience, that real-life Fight Clubs started to emerge.

The story shows an experiment in which the members of Fight Club pick fights with random strangers (and are supposed to lose), which isn’t as easy as it sounds; most people do everything to avoid physical conflict.

But Fight Club makes us wonder if it’s a good thing that we’ve lost touch with these primal tendencies. Should we repress this part of human nature? Or, perhaps, integrate it in healthy and constructive ways?

Self-destruction

When the story progresses, Tyler and the narrator begin to see the world through a different lens. Tyler criticizes the modern self-improvement hype by saying: “Self-improvement is masturbation. Now self-destruction… ”

This statement is slightly confusing, as the increasingly destructive nature of Fight Club, in which faces are permanently mutilated and teeth are knocked out of people’s heads, doesn’t seem to be a sustainable way to live.

But Tyler might be onto something when we look at self-destruction as the destruction of a false self.

‘Self-improvement’ often points to the accumulation of external goods: a better house, a better job, a better body, more money. But why should we endlessly want to improve ourselves? Why can’t we just be happy with how things are, and take life as it comes? Or as Tyler states:

“I say never be complete, I say stop being perfect, I say let’s evolve, let the chips fall where they may.”

We create an identity through material wealth, and social status. And as far as Tyler is concerned, this false sense of self must be destroyed, before we are free to do anything we want. Therefore, the ‘space monkeys’ of Project Mayhem live by a mantra which goes like this:

“You are not your job, you’re not how much money you have in the bank. You are not the car you drive. You’re not the contents of your wallet. You are not your fucking khakis. You are all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world.” - Tyler Durden, Fight Club

Tyler makes a so-called human sacrifice, namely a man called Raymond who works a dead-end job in a convenience store. Raymond wanted to be a veterinarian, but didn’t make it because it was “too much studying.” Tyler threatens Raymond, saying that if he doesn’t start studying within six weeks, he’ll kill him.

In this scene, Tyler points to another aspect of self-destruction: the act of letting go of fears, negative self-talk, and all distractions, so we can fully focus on our purpose. It’s the destruction of everything within ourselves that holds us back from living life on our own terms.

A near-life experience

Many people go great lengths when it comes to pain avoidance. The problem is that running from pain means running from an inevitable part of life.

The prospect of incurring pain makes us anxious, and often leads to self-indulgent decisions. That is: choosing the less painful path, even if a more painful path guarantees more success and pleasure in the future.

Tyler Durden deals with this by inflicting a chemical wound on the narrator’s hand using lye.

As expected, the narrator does everything to escape the pain: he uses visualization techniques he learned at a seminar, and retreating in his cave to find his ‘power animal’. But Tyler slaps him in the face, forcing him to stay with the pain, saying: “This is the greatest moment of your life, man. And you’re off somewhere missing it.”

For the narrator, Tyler has one central goal: he must reach bottom. After putting him through suffering, and destroying his false identity, there’s yet another aspect that must be crushed: hope. Losing all hope is freedom. And, therefore, he must reject what has rejected him: his father, and God. I quote:

“Consider the possibility that God does not like you. In all probability, he hates you.” - Tyler Durden, Fight Club

Tyler states that we don’t need God. That we shouldn’t care about redemption and damnation. And if we’re God’s unwanted children, so be it. Thereby, we lose all hope, but are also liberated from religious doctrine and fatherly authority.

Now we’re truly free. Now we can create our own meaning, and live how we want to live.

Tyler emphasizes the importance of knowing what we want in life. To achieve this, we must be willing to get out of our comfort zone and jump into the unknown without safety brackets.

The narrator, however, has difficulties letting go of security. He begs Tyler to not mess around when he lets go of the steering wheel in a driving car while hitting the gas. Tyler calls the narrator ‘pathetic’, and yells: “hitting bottom isn’t a weekend retreat. It’s not a goddamn seminar. Stop trying to control everything and just let go!”

After an inevitable car crash, Tyler states that they just had a ‘near-life experience’.

Wrap up

Fight Club is a story about rebellion against the status quo and a plea for the simple life. It criticizes the ways in which we are so hung up on security, and material possessions, and how people let social norms dictate their lives.

‘Stuff’ has become our religion. The idols we worship are Ikea and Starbucks. And the more we immerse ourselves in such an empty and unfulfilling existence, the more we start to resemble the things that we produce: manufactured products rather than authentic human beings.

Tyler shows us a way out. And even though his insights are profound, the execution is questionable. Fight Club, and its terrorist branch Project Mayhem, show us how easy it is to oppose one ideology, in order to fall into another, and how a cult-like echo chamber built on rigid beliefs could become very destructive.

Nevertheless, Tyler challenges us to be self-sufficient and disobedient to the authorities that let us down, to live authentically and in the moment, to confront our fears, to boldly step out of our comfort zones, and let the things that don’t matter truly slide.

[victimhood]

The one in which the Euros 3rd place playoff is abolished after Italia 1980, and then restored at short notice for Italia 2028, making it the historic occasion in which a whole country cockblocked their captain Nicolò di Genova.

It is June 1980. The European Championship is taking place in Italy. It is the first edition of the tournament with eight teams, divided into two groups. The winners of each group move on to play in the final, and the runners up of each group move on to battle for third place.

It is the final edition of the Euros to have the third place playoff. With dwindling attendances and television viewers, UEFA deems the fixture unnecessary for future editions of the tournament. Italy hold Czechoslovakia to a 1-1 draw, and the match is decided on penalties. The final outcome? 9-8 to Czechoslovakia.

For as long as it has existed, there has been vocal opposition to the third place match. There are those who question its purpose, who see it as a meaningless extension of the tournament for advertisement money. A kinder commentary on offer is from those who see it as cruel to make losers play yet another competitive fixture, for little to no reward. Just think of the fourth-placed team—they played better than the rest of the competition except three—yet they must go home with the bitter memory of having lost twice.

On the other camp, there are those who recall with great fondness the third place match of the 2002 World Cup between host nation South Korea and Turkey. If that doesn’t work for you, what about the consolation it offered to the host nation in the 1990 World Cup, a breakout tournament for Italy’s Roberto Baggio?

Now we skip to June 2028. The European Championship is once more taking place in Italy. There are twenty four teams divided into groups, followed by a knockout stage. There is no third place fixture on the schedule. The much-beloved Italian captain takes his team on a blistering dream run, in front of an adoring home crowd, beating a well-regarded Portugal and incumbent holders Belgium along the way. He has declared his intention to retire for good, once this tournament is over.

Picture this: you are Italy. You play England in the semifinal in Napoli, at the Stadio San Paolo, also known as the Stadio Diego Armando Maradona. You arrive in the stadium, or you watch from home, full of hope, with faith in your captain and your squad. Your team scores one at the 20th minute. Perfect opening. England try but they can’t get past the deadbolt across goal, past your much vaunted defensive line. At the 63rd minute, Foden puts one past your goalie, but VAR rules it offside. At the 89th minute, the scoreline is still 1-0 and you’re nearly through, and some egregious fans are already cheering, and then Foden gets it in for real in a stroke of sheer luck. The ball hits the crossbar but somehow bounces downward into goal. The game goes into extra time, and then to penalties. The final result? England wins 4-3 on penalties. This is a brutal game. At the end of your match, your captain sheds tears and apologizes for not being able to do more to push the team through to the finals. No! You want to scream. Caro Nicolò, il nostro capitano, it’s not your fault. You have done so much for us. You begin to blame yourself: it’s us, it’s our fault. We dared to dream too early. You were so busy dreaming of your beloved captain raising the trophy that you forgot the game wasn’t over. In fact, even before this semifinal you were already dreaming of the trophy. This is how fate punishes you. You hate to see him end his career this way. He didn’t let you down, you let your captain down! Can we do this one over? You’ll do right by your captain this time.

Picture this: you’re the president of UEFA, and the tournament is hosted in your home country. It would have been the honor of honors, to award the winner’s medals to your compatriots. The papers are raging over the match outcome: England squeaked through on a razor’s blade, and Italy were the more inspired team. The fans are out in the streets. The people have spoken! Let us bring back the third place match! Let us see our captain off with dignity and honor! Your colleagues say: this is preposterous. We got rid of it years ago, because of Italia 1980. But does anyone really remember why? The advertisers tell you they’re willing to pay. One extra match means extra revenues. Worse things have happened in the pursuit for money. What’s the harm in a consolation match? An emergency meeting is called. Who’s playing in the second semifinal? France and the Netherlands. Both their feds agree to the third place match. From the next tournament onwards, there’ll even be a sweet cherry of a coefficient bonus—all the feds agree to this, but it would not be fair to the rest to apply it this ongoing tournament (and you hear minor grumbles from the FIGC, FFF and KNVB, who think they should be compensated for the inconvenience). No matter; the people have been given what they want! Another football match in the grand machine of things! The meeting takes so long that France beats the Netherlands 3-2 in the meantime, and now someone has to do the unpleasant job of telling the players. Were any of them consulted in this affair? What a preposterous concept. That’s not how UEFA works. UEFA says jump and they say how high.

Picture this: you are Nicolò Di Genova, and you’ve played the final match of your professional career. It did not end in the way you wanted, but such is life. You are ready to put your former self in the grave. You say goodbye to your treasured teammates, and the very next morning you check out of the training center to make your way to Turin, to see your fidanzato in the semifinals. Well, he crashes out too, his downfall orchestrated by that paraculo of your club teammate, Sébastien of the number 23. And so it is England vs France in the final, to be played in Italy. The thought of it turns even the strongest stomach of any citizen of this noble country. The only silver lining to this cursed final lineup is getting to whisk the love of your life off into the secluded countryside, and maybe with a few rounds of passionate lovemaking you can even forget the pain of loss.

You’re in the car. You just picked up your inamorato from his team hotel. You want to push him into the backseat and blow the brains out of him but you have better self control than that.

“How does retirement feel like?” he cracks a joke at you.

“You know full well my plans,” you return cheekily.

You’re driving off into the E70 when your phone rings. It doesn’t stop ringing so you pull over to take the call.

It’s your national team coach. “They just restored the third place match. Can you come back to the training ground?”

Who agreed to this? Your mind is reeling from the preposterousness of it all.

“They love you, Nichi. The people want you back.”

You exchange a look with your lover. Now his phone is ringing too. It’s his coach.

Due to this unfortunate turn of events you end up having an argument with your lover. You are principled, and having principles means not giving in to this total farce of a circus show, the third place match. Your lover is an incurable romantic, and pleads on behalf of your people. They did this all for you—show them some love in return. And what was the meaning of the past 31 years of your life again? You have already given them everything.

If only the people of Italy knew how much they had to thank Yusuf Al Kaysani. It’s because of him—it’s because of his beautiful deep brown eyes that glisten with all the stars of this universe that you cave and you agree.

“Get out, let’s switch. I’ll drive, and you call your mom and tell her the news.”

How do you begin to articulate how much this man knows the answers in your heart before your brain catches up to the same conclusions?

And so, like Lazarus, on the fourth day of your death you come back to life.

ITA vs NED

Picture this: you’re the cameraman, in the tunnel. The teams are lining up. The two captains emerge from the dressing room and compliment each other on their good looks with wry smiles. Some good natured ribbing, you think. They’re old friends. They played together for eight years at the same club. The Italian captain puts his hands on the Dutch captain, and then, like magnets, his hands seem incapable of leaving the Dutch captain’s back. You start to feel uncomfortable, like you’re seeing something that you shouldn’t be seeing. You look around. Everyone else in the double file of blue and orange is just chatting away, acting normal. Maybe...it’s just your imagination? You train your camera on the chatting crowd, giving the captains space. The match officials appear, taking the lead in front of both teams. You get in position for the money shot, following the two teams out of the tunnel and into the adoring crowd.

Picture this: you have never missed a single football match your grandson plays in. So when there’s a surprise third place match announced, you have to bail on karaoke night with the girls to watch the match on tv. Your friends don’t watch football, but if they do, they watch for the “hot guys on the Italian team”. Oh yeah, he’s playing Italy, you tell them. Feel free to come over to my place, if they don’t mind your oldest son and your rowdy grandchildren. Karaoke night swiftly becomes football night. There is an argument between Hamza and his dad over the pointlessness of the third place playoff. So...your family has been behaving in an unusual manner for several months now, and you suspect it’s because your grandson said he is gay. The papers here don’t report it, because they still want to claim him to some extent, but you have noted that the coverage is more conditional than before. You don’t live under a rock, and you’ve seen the news on YouTube even if no one around you is prepared to talk about it. As the two teams walk out of the tunnel and onto the pitch, you notice the Italian captain letting his hand slip from your grandson’s back, and Hamza suddenly jumps in front of the TV screen to adjust the volume.

“What the heck are you doing?” Mehdi, Hamza’s father and your eldest son, yells.

“The audio was...wonky,” Hamza replies sheepishly. “But I think it’s okay now.”

The match begins. At a corner kick, the Italian captain practically plasters himself all over your grandson, and it’s Hamza messing with the TV remote again, this time accidentally switching channels. Mehdi slaps him in the back of the head. You think that maybe it’s time you called Ibrahim. Someone needs to tell you the truth they’ve been so bad at hiding. Your grandson is not just gay, he seems to have a lover, and it’s that evil-eyed captain, the man who curses all who cross him.

Picture this: you’re a fan from the friendly town of Muggenbeet, watching from the San Siro. You came all this way to support the Oranje and they had to concede that final goal to France in front of your face. Sore and in denial about your loss, you start to make jokes about Waterloo to cope, handing the French off to the English. And then—out of nowhere, UEFA announces that they’ll restore the third place match. You think it’s the most shameless attempt for the host country to award themselves something ever. But, you know, does anyone really want to watch an England-France final? No. Never. For forever. We hate them both. It’s not football. It’s a circus of clowns. The viewership for this third place match is through the roof, higher than for your semifinal vs France. Let’s just treat this as the real final. What a galaxy-brained idea. Your country could steal it from the hosts—no hard feelings to Italy. You’ve enjoyed the pizza and the pasta, maybe it would be fun to crush their team like little peppercorns to sprinkle on your food. Based. Now you want a cacio e pepe after the match. Wait, you’re not in Rome, where the real (fake news!) final is. Boo. There is a corner, right at the end where you are sitting. Poepjes is taking it. Dekmijn and Blootgat are running up. Your captain is being felt up by the Italian captain. (No literally, that guy isn’t even looking at the goal? He’s just...pressing himself against your captain? Why are his hands encircled around Al Kaysani’s waist like so?) Anyway, the ball pings between the Italian keeper and Blootgat, and then it flies into Di Genova’s rather shapely calves...and bounces into the goal.

Uhhhhhh, THANK YOU? Grazie mille Nicolò Di Genova!!!! You gave us one goal!!!

The Italian fans must be flabbergasted. Isn’t this the dude’s retirement match? Or whatever. Who knows. Italy is a place of the greatest contradictions, so you’ve been told. But you’ll take what you can get. You kinda feel bad for the guy, who has buried his face in his hands. Maybe...you should cheer for him. And so...the lot of you, the orange lot, sitting in the Curva Sud, you start singing for the Italian captain. Nicolò Di Genova! There’s only one Di Genova!

The third place match is the most lawless ninety minutes in the historical timeline.

Picture this: you’re an Interista and season ticket holder. And of course you support your national team. You were heartbroken when the England keeper denied Marcuzzi to progress to the finals. You cried when your captain cried. And then, out of nowhere, they said, let’s bring back the third place match. The finals are in the Stadio Olimpico, so...maybe let’s have the third place match in the San Siro? You score a ticket at your usual seat. You get to see your captain one more time before he rides off into the sunset? What more can you ask for? This is romance of the highest order. The San Siro loves Nichi, of course all the staff and volunteers come together to make the event happen in a matter of days. You can’t believe this is happening. And then...your captain opens the scoring with an own goal. The Dutch fans are singing for him. What do you do? Well, if you can’t beat them, join them—you can sing louder for your captain! He’s your captain! And you know, their captain, he’s kinda your guy too, because Sempre Inter. Revenge is served, sweet and cold like a scoop of gelato, when your captain heads in the equalizer. The crowd goes wild. He’s taking this match seriously, but you knew he always would—that’s why you love him. He could ask for your firstborn and you would gladly give it up. You can always trust your capitano. There is a penalty call in the second half of the match and his teammates give it to him—a little unorthodox—but like a deadly sniper your captain sneaks a cool and calculated one past the Dutch keeper. You cheer. Does it count as a hat trick when you’ve scored at both ends? What a scoreline to retire to!

Picture this: you’re Yusuf Al Kaysani. You just lost in the third place match, a match widely panned as the least necessary match in a tournament by those who don’t know better. And yet, the third place match is the purest expression of love for the beautiful game. All other matches are clouded by the temptations of fame and fortune. The third place match you play for love and honor. You watch from the sidelines as your boyfriend leads his team to collect the medals, from none other than Paolo Maldini. Maldini, who’s doing an admirable job as UEFA President. Who knows where and how they got these medals at short notice—sometimes this country pulls miracles like a rabbit out from the magician’s hat of chaos. Everyone in the stadium is acting like this is the final. It’s not—it’s something a little better, a match born of love, played for love, with nothing to win and nothing to lose.

There is no trophy to lift, so Nico’s teammates lift him. They’re yelling for you. You’ve played with and against at least 90% of that team. Come join us, the men in blue say, and everyone forms a circle, arm linking arm, bouncing to the music. There are no losers here—your whole team is invited to the celebrations. The Dutch fans are singing: Second place! Second place! Let’s pretend we’re second place!

Let’s be real, for this one night, in this exact stadium, there’s only one captain, and the ones in the know push you towards him. Here’s your man, the unspoken acknowledgement. But you know your place—this is not your night. This night is for him. It’s for the country that loves him, and for him to say one last goodbye. Daniele Pirozzi jumps on the captain’s back, and the captain carries him for a while, laughing away. Pirozzi, whom you spent countless hours training how to read the field, in a fashion after yours. And then there’s Boselli, Marcuzzi, Poepjes and more. From one generation to another, the baton is passed. Nico, look around, these are our boys, as good as any. They’ll be better than us, and we are happy to see it, for the love of the game. Pirozzi jumps off the captain’s back and jumps onto you, asking you if you want to lift the captain together. You laugh and agree. On the count of three, uno, due—

Picture this: you’re Nicolò Di Genova, and you’re sitting on the shoulders of your protegé and your lover. Here we can mark the passing of the guard—tonight you are unburdened and the only thing that’s left, you realize, is love. Yusuf was right. Look, look how much they love you. Even San Paolo did this for you. Could you ever have denied all of them this? You almost screwed it up at the beginning, but perhaps God was just reminding you to take your responsibilities seriously. You are but a servant of the game and this ground is your ground, your hallowed ground, the church of your sins and glory.

It’s the final competitive match of your career, and you get to walk off the field, arm in arm with the love of your life, cheered on by a country you gave everything to.

Now, for the rest of your life to begin.

(chapter 106: nel blu, dipinto di blu, of The Beautiful Game)

[cartoonfangirl1218]

Winner’s Curse Ch. 22

“Please please come in quickly,” the honorable wizard Yen Sid urged Uma, barely muffling his own coughs from the dusty air of Judge Frollo’s “house.” Quite ironically or perhaps more telling, Judge Frollo’s abode was the basement of a brothel. A cruel twist of temptation or perhaps a house of convenience since it was no secret that Frollo indulged in his hypocritical desires while preaching at his imaginary pulpit during the day.

But Uma wasn’t here to hear how she was destined for hell. It was night, the perfect time to meet the rest of the Anti-Villain Club while Frollo was away.

It felt like the situation was getting more dire the more time past. Amplified by the restlessness Uma felt because they weren’t getting anything done!

Sometimes Uma wanted to give in to her temptation to just dump the Auradonians for themselves. They didn’t really offer her any information or skills that she needed. Plus, they were slow at best. Uncaring and disobedient at worse, far more concerned with their own problems and feelings. They didn’t know how to work with a team or for a cause other than themselves.

Such royal behavior. Must be nice to put your moods first when your need for food, shelter and safety were never in question.

So it was a breath of fresh air to meet with the Anti Villains. Though they did not give her the assuring efficiency of her pirate crew, they were still Vks, her people. And she would need all the allies she could get if they were to stop the Coven.

Yen Sid gestured to the faded rug with, of course, an image of a man bleeding and crucified while a red devilish monster stabbed at his torso with a pitchfork.

Frollo’s erstwhile, rebellious daughter, Claudine took the head of the rug with Diego De’Vil and Yzla on both sides of her. Harold, Jason, Hadie, Big Murph, Hermie Bing, Eddie Balthazar, Celia and a blonde girl that Uma didn’t recognize rounded out the rest of the circle. Uma took place across from Claudine and Yen Sid stood by, pacing around.

“What news can you give us?” Yen Sid asked, starting the meeting abruptly.

Uma hadn’t noticed when Yen Sid signalled to her from the alleyways but the elder wizard looked even older. He was hunched over, not from age but like there was an invisible yoke on his shoulders. His face was riddled with new lines of wrinkles, stress and fatigue. And he was pale. So pale.

Uma had seen that sort of sickly paleness before. The sheen of sweat from a non-existent flu. He looked like death. The Isle after 20 years was starting to take its toll.

Though Uma had no personal attachment to the wizard nor did she care for his method of teaching goodness so Vks would be accepted in Auradon, when they should be accepted because they like any other person should have a home without abuse or poverty, she respected what he was trying to do. He didn’t see them all as one mass of worthless deviants to be scorned and ignored. He could have stayed in Auradon, doing nothing like all the rest of the so-called good guys, but he didn’t.

And this place was slowly killing him.

This place was going to be the death of all them if Uma’s revolution didn’t work.

Uma cracked her neck, inhaled and began to brief them, even though her report didn’t offer much encouragement that their plans were going to be successful.

“Our communications link with King Ben no longer works thanks to the Isle’s crappy service. However, we were able to inform him that the invasion is taking place in less than a week before we were cut off.” “Circe is officially on our side and will assist Yen Sid on more complex, powerful spells against Nerissa and the others.”

“The rest of the Coven-” “Believes.. Well actually tolerates the idea that you and Calix are still loyal. Lala still is on their side but Jade thinks she can convince her to switch again. Zevon and Ginny are lost causes. But you are going to round up your crew, and Harriet’s crew for extra manpower.” Yzla interrupted, and shrugged at Uma’s glare, “Jade told me.” “Ah yes.” Uma pursed her lips, shaking it off to not act too ruffled. She had been aware that Yzla and Jade were close but she didn’t particularly like that they were discussing things without her. That’s how plans got overturned. And people were overthrown.

Uma pushed that thought away as too paranoid. After all, they were all here for the same thing. Escape, not power.

“Yes, so you already know that. I do believe we will be able to persuade the rest of the Isle on our side.” “Wait the rest of the Isle. Like you mean some other kids right? Or the Hun gang. Not not the whole Isle?” Eddie asked. “I meant the rest of the Isle. The adult henchmen. The orphaned kids. The Huns, the mercenaries, the prostitutes. Anyone and everyone who has no power or big villain names.” The rest of the club looked at turns confused, intrigued and disbelieving at her.

“They are like us. They gain nothing from the Coven gaining more power. They get everything if they helped the revolution. No more oppressors. And a promise from King Ben to take all of us off the Isle to better housing, new jobs and actual food. A better life.”

“Whether Mal likes it or not.” Uma added internally. That had been the one thing she managed to speak to King Ben about, and surprisingluy he agreed wholeheartedly. He had seemed horrified when she described the living conditions that children dealt with. The way teens had turned to violence among other things to survive their abusive parents. He didn’t think he’d be able to convince Auradon should be abolished completely. Big villains would probably stay indefinitely. But he was welcome to her suggestions for programs to hep Vks.

“That’s why I need your input. King Ben is putting me in charge of VK Integration Programs and I want to know what we need.” “Uh, that’s nice. A truly Christian thing to do,” Claudine sneered saracastically, she had always been the most doubting of anyone having good intentions what with who she had for a father, “But shouldn’t we get out of here before we plan any VK Integration Programs?”

“This is part of how we are going to persuade the rest of the Isle to help us,” Uma smoothly bridged the two disparting ideas, “We need solid plans with how, what, when. Something solid and real that people can imagine and believe in. When the other Vks and adults hear of these programs, these programs that are as real as when King Ben invited the Core Four, they will be willing to fight for their chance to get in. They will rise up against the Coven so that they could be free.”

Claudine and Diego still looked suspicious, but Jason, Harold, and Big Murph practically had stars in their eyes. Hermie was smiling shyly and Hadie was tapping his chin thoughtfully. He was the first to pitch in.

“I think there should be something for the victims of Hans and Lars.” Everyone turned to look at him which caused the spiky-blue haired teen to flush and clam up. , Uma nodded empathetically, “Continue.” “Well, I mean-uh.Well we all had it bad. But Prince Hans is another level of bad. I went there once with dad for one of Staylan’s parties and I lurked around and man, that dude is nuts. He has photos of his “harem” all “sexy bruised” and stuff. And Lars…”

Uma narrowed her eyes. She didn’t need Hadie to elaborate on Lars. Gil had already told her everything she needed to know about the icy sadist. It was a term that was generally thrown around for an island full of villains with bloodlust, but Gil described the sickeningly calm way Lars acted. How Lars almost described it in seductive terms the way a whip would constrict a person’s throat until the breath left them. The calculating gaze he’d watch the ones he picked as “lovers.” Apparently a sadism that he picked up from his dad.

“Yeah, everyone knows Drizella is his favorite. Poor Dizzy.” Eddie shook his head.

Dizzy had always been left alone with her grandmother, Lady Tremine, but Uma had always assumed that Drizella, like almost all the parents on the Isle, was neglectful and uncaring. She hadn’t thought that Drizella may have been dealing with her own things.

And why wouldn’t she? That was Gil’s mother had to go through everyday with being Gaston’s unfavorite. While Uma was more concerned with the kids on the Isle, she could see now that some adults may need help too.

“Great. Center for sadist victims. What else have we got?”

“Do we have to go to school if we go to Auradon? I just don’t think I need it. My band is doing pretty well and I bet those royal dorks never heard music like mine.” Diego mock-shredded on his guitar

Uma cocked her head. She got his point. She didn’t think there was anything Auradon Prep had that could teach her anything useful. Like smizing as she heard from Celia Faciliar’s letters from Freddie. Plus there were some teens near adulthood like Harriet who probably wouldn’t want to be forced into classes when they could get jobs. Same with adults who never learned to read in their lives and still didnt want to.

“I’ll talk about it with King Ben. What else?” Uma said.

“Food that isn’t covered with flies. Fresh food, not trash.” Hermie said.

“Uh that’s just a given. None of their food is rotten.” Celia told the lithe brunette before Uma could clarify that good food comes with the territory.

Several ideas were thrown around, but the main ones came down to food, homes away from the possible revenge of their parents and others, and none of the Goodness 101 that Celia heard Freddie taking.

“Great. Now the important thing is that you spread the word of these programs to the other. You have to make people want this badly enough that they will fight. Act like its their only chance because it is. From there, I will send my crew to organize them to key points and learn some better and dirtier fight tactics.” Uma announced.

The rest of the Club nodded somberly at the announcement. There was not much emotion from Uma’s command. No relief, excitement or even nervousness. Just a numb sort of nod that they understood. But the words, “This is your only chance,” clearly rang in their heads.

It was now or never.

Everyone slowly got up to leave, thinking their own thoughts except the blonde who slipped to walk next to Uma, expertly slinking through the alleyways.

“Hi, um, I know we haven’t met before but um.. I’m Cosette.” The literally dirty blonde introduced in a fake high voice, clearly highlighting her nervousness, “I’m Gaston’s daughter. Gil’s half sister? You know Gil right? I mean, of course you do. I’ve seen him and everyone knows he hangs with you. I’m sorry I’m babbling. It’s just this is all so new-”

Uma stopped walking so she could give her her full attention. Yes, now that she stopped to actually look at Cosette, she could see a bit of the resemblance. The blonde hair, the high forehead and cheekbones. She looked older, maybe Harriet’s age, though her ample chest peeking from her corset gave the impression of a woman in her 20s. Unlike Gil, she didn’t have the usually confused look in her eyes. Just scared.

That look heightened Uma’s protective instincts. The helpless usually did that, as unvillainous as that was, plus the Gil resemblance.

“Why haven’t I heard of you before?” Uma asked skeptically even though she was pretty sure Cosette was honest.

“Um I’m a girl. Dad wouldn’t acknowledge me. Actually he tried to throw me away and try again which is why Mom left and… it seemed safer to avoid him. But- but I heard from Celia about this Anti-Villain Club when I went in for a reading, and Celia said you’d come so I thought I’d ask you. You know, for permission.” Uma thought. The story was realistic enough. But there was too much to do right now to focus on a family reunion. Unless…

“I will. You have my word. But first, how good would you say your fighting and/or spying skills?”

[sparksinthenight]

Hi guys! So, I’m sure we all know how many atrocities are being done at the border by Trump’s administration and ICE. I’m sure we all know that under Biden things will be better. But under Biden things will still not be good. ICE will still exist, and it is a horrible organization that is a hazard to human rights and needs to be abolished. Under Biden deportations will still happen, separating families though not quite as badly. And Biden might delay the process of dismantling all that Trump has put in place. He might delay the process of freeing people from immigration detention and reuniting families. I’m writing to him to ask him to not delay in freeing and reuniting the people and to abolish ICE, immigration detention centres, deportations, and to pay reparations. If you guys write too, then we’ll have more pressure on him to act honourably and it’ll be more likely that he does what we ask. So honestly feel free to take two minutes to copy-paste the letter into here:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Dear President Biden,

I am writing to you today to ask you to not delay any time in undoing the human rights nightmare that Trump has created for migrants and asylum seekers at the border and to immediately reunite all the children with their families and to close the immigration detention facilities. Do not delay any time in releasing and reuniting everyone. As well, I am asking you to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement and to stop deporting people who are undocumented, because they have a right to live in America the same as anyone else who needs to. It would also be good if reparations were provided for those harmed by ICE, especially under the Trump administration.

I’m sure you already know the mass atrocities Trump has committed at the boarder. He has separated thousands of children from their families, subjecting them to immense and long-lasting trauma, subjecting them to immense and long-lasting trauma, put them in incredibly abusive situations, subjected women to sexual and medical abuse, and subjected all immigration detainees to horrible conditions, deporting many without a fair trial.

This needs to end as soon as you get into office. No waiting. You need to close the immigration detention centres as soon as possible. You need to release all the people as soon as possible.You need to reunite the children with their families as soon as humanly possible. And you need to ensure that every single child is reunited with their family.

Hopefully you will also provide reparations for all the people who have had to go through this nightmare and all the people who have previously had their lives harmed by ICE. Also ICE itself needs to be abolished. It has shown itself to be a horrible organization run by horrible people. Finally, undocumented people should not get deported. Undocumented people are among the most vulnerable people and they just want better lives for themselves and their loved ones.

Sincerely, ____________

More background:

Separating a child from their family is an incredibly traumatizing and cruel thing to do to a child. Children need to have stable, steady, continuous, and constant frequent access to their families. They need it for their mental and emotional health and development as well as their physical health since mental health has a huge effect on physical health. The parents of over six hundred and thirty children have been lost and they might never be reunited again. This is horrific.

And the children have been abused incredibly as well. They have been placed without enough adults to take care of them, and older children are having to take care of younger ones. The adults that are around are emotionally, verbally, and even sometimes physically and sexually abusive towards the children. The children have to sleep on the floor with the lights on, they don’t have access to soap and toothpaste and proper sanitation, and the food they get is not nutritious. This abuse, also, is incredibly traumatizing and adds more trauma onto the trauma they already face from being separated from their loved ones. Some children have even died, including a boy as young as just two years old.

Women, also, are being treated horrifically in immigration detention. Sexual abuse is rife. Many women have gotten hysterectomies against their will and this is eugenics and it is genocide tactics.  A recorded thirty women have gone through miscarriages and the people who run the detention camps did not give them any help. Those fetuses could’ve probably been saved. This is also eugenics.

Not to mention the conditions at immigration detention camps for people of all ages are absolutely atrocious. There isn’t adequate healthcare. Since 2017, 39 adults have died in ICE custody or immediately after being released. There is not good nutritious food. There is no soap or cleaning supplies. The conditions are so bad that people have committed suicide. It was discovered that some camps were releasing poisonous chemical sprays frequently and it was making detainees sick. The immigration detention camps have been described as “experimental concentration camps” by whistleblowers.

This is what is happening. This is what people are going through. This needs to end as soon as you get into office. No waiting. We can’t slowly dismantle the situation Donald Trump has created. This needed to stop before it even began. People who are being mistreated by ICE cannot wait even another second for their human rights. They desperately need to find peace and freedom as soon as possible.

We need to close the immigration detention centres as soon as possible. We need to release all the people as soon as possible.

We need to reunite the children with their families as soon as humanly possible. And we need to ensure that every single child is reunited with their family.

Hopefully there will also be reparations for all the people who have had to go through this nightmare and all the people who have previously had their lives harmed by ICE. It is hard for someone to rebuild their life after going through such horrific, unspeakable experiences. Children separated from their parents often remain traumatized for years.

Also ICE itself needs to be abolished. It has shown itself to be a horrible organization run by horrible people. ICE, it’s members, and it’s organization structure have done all this. They have shown themselves not just capable of but willing to utterly destroy the lives and happiness of thousands of people including children. They have shown themselves to be deeply corrupt to the absolute core. There is no coming back from this. There is no way to purify an organization as corrupt and bloodthirsty as ICE. They need to be gotten rid of entirely or else they will use whatever opportunities they can to abuse people and will always be a danger to humanity. ICE needs to be abolished entirely.

As well, immigration detention centres need to be abolished as well. Even before the Trump era, they were used to detain and imprison families whose only crime was living in America. They are not something we need in a free and human rights-oriented society. And as we’ve seen, they can be used for mass atrocities.

Finally, undocumented people should not get deported. A lot of them live in America because their home countries are dangerous and they would risk their lives by living there. A lot of them live in America because they face devastating poverty in their home countries and are just trying to make a very basic income to take care of their loved ones. Undocumented people are among the most vulnerable people and they just want better lives for themselves and their loved ones. They have a right to live here, the same as anyone else. They have a right to live here the same as documented people do. They have friends and families that they would have to be leaving behind if they are deported. Deportations, carried out by both the Democrat and Republican parties, have separated families by removing parents and guardians rather than removing children. The children often still have their other parent or at least their next of kin so that’s good but it still puts immense and undue stress on young people.

Deportations need to end. ICE needs to end. Immigration detention needs to end. All the people imprisoned by the Trump administration need to be let go immediately and all children need to be reunited with their families immediately. And reparations are in order.

Migrants and asylum seekers must and desperately need to be treated with the same level of human dignity as anyone else.

[maybe-its-micheal]

This is a bit of a throw back, but does anyone remember Niki and Ranboo's argument before Doomsday?

This is when Dream and Techno were planning to destroy L'manburg, everyone knew about it and were arguing what to do. I feel like this conversation is incredibly eye-opening to Niki's old perspective, Ranboo's current perspective and the purpose of the syndicate. Also still thematically relevant to how today's lore is developing!

Here's an excerpt:

Ranboo: If L'manburg didn't exist what would happen? Tell me right now, Tubbo wouldn't have exiled his best friend to go on an island and almost die.

Niki: We wouldn't have a home! We wouldn't have a home, Ranboo. If L'manbueg didn't exist we wouldn't have a home.

Ranboo: Home isn't where a country is! Are you kidding me? I could build a dirt shack and then I have a home!

Niki: we fought for it, I fought for it, we fought for it in multiple wars-

Ranboo: but why? Why? Because you guys wanted to correlate with a side!

Puffy: No! They fought for their freedoms.

It perfectly showcases the two different perspectives at the time, not just in Ranboo and Niki and Puffy, but in everyone, even now. You had someone like Niki who was around during the first revolution, who went through Dream's oppression and knew why separating from that country was so necessary. She and the others fought in many wars to protect their new nation, because they felt like a nation that had their interests at heart was worth sacrificing for. That was what hoke meant to them.

Then there's Ranboo, who as someone very close to many people in L'manburg saw its bad side without the bias fighting for it causes. Things like the stress Tubbo was put through and all the impossible decisions he was forced to make, the sacrifices people like Tommy went through, willingly or not, to keep L'manburg safe and free, the fear in people like Quackity of loosing power, and constantly keeping up a battle to make sure you're not going to sink again. To him it was the furthest thing from a true home, just like Dream SMP was for Niki and the other L'manburgians during the revolution.

I believe that in theory and ideals L'manburg was much better than Dream SMP, and that was what Niki saw because those ideas are what she fought for. However, in practice, I think both lead to an unjust amount of suffering, which is what Ranboo saw since he lived as a citizen. Previously people saw things as either Pro-Dream SMP or Pro-L'manburg, and being pro one ment you were anti the other. Ranboo hated this! He was not Anti-L'manburg or Anti-Dream SMP, he was Anti-Sides and Pro-Harm Reduction. He saw that L'manburg and Dream SMP were sides that both caused harm, and so the most logical thing to get rid of sides. Whether he realized it or not, this meant get rid of government. He didnt want to replace them with a new country, he wanted no more countries since it just lead to more fighting, making him functionally an anarchist.

Rejecting nations is obviously something Niki had done, she was litterally a revolutionary, but she went about it differently- in a way that in current lore she's moved on from. She wanted a new nation to be formed, with a party that had her interests in charge as opposed to Dream leading with his own interests. It makes sense, because she saw the way the country was run as the problem, and so a country run better was surely the solution.

Ranboo, however, joined at a time when L'manburg was well established and had its own history already. It wasn't a revolution anymore, it was just a normal war between two different nations. Two different sides fighting and keeping everyone from being happy, there were still the same problems. So naturally he saw the solution to be abolish sides! No more government, no more power. Dream doesn't get to tell Wilbur what drugs he can't make, and Tubbo doesn't get to tell Tommy that he can't live there anymore. Its not even necessarily blaming Dream or Tubbo for those things, they were diplomatic decisions made for the protection of the state. But if you remove the state... no more problems!

And those experiences and perspectives are why they clashed here!! This is probably one of my favorite lore moments, it was subtle and natural, acted out well, had so much depth and history, and a lot of thematic layers that can still be applied!!

Niki is an anarchist now, so obviously her perspective has shifted- now she sees government itself as the problem as opposed to how government is run, which makes sense. She lived in a bad government, tried to make a good one, but it was also bad. The next thing that logically follows is getting rid of them all together, but there are still many people who are Pro-Country. With the syndicate I believe we will be seeing a lot of similar clashes to the argument, which I more than look forward too ^^ There's so much to discuss and learn here, its such a huge chunk of the meaning of the plot and ai love it.

If any of you want to share your thoughts Im more than interested :D this is one of my favorite parts of dsmp and I could listen to you talk for an eternity ^^

[histoireettralala]

A short history of dueling in France

Dueling is a custom of fighting by arms, according to precise rules, to settle a dispute between two adversaries, one asking the other for compensation for an offense or a wrong. In Europe, it is preceded by a challenge, usually signified by a cartel. The fight takes place in front of arbitrators, now called witnesses, who ensure compliance with the rules and specific conventions fixed in advance (number of  hits by bladed weapon or firearm). In a pleasure duel (to show off) the number of hits is fixed. In a duel to the death, we speak of "excessive duel".

The duel was aimed at regulating and limiting the violence caused by a conflict between two individuals. By fixing the terms for the resolution of the conflict, it obliged the opposing parties to agree through dialogue on settled upon conditions and constituted a kind of contractual criminal law, the judicial duel. Integrated in the late Middle Ages into criminal procedure by different customs, the legal duel evolved between the Hundred Years War and the Renaissance in private law contracts as parliaments refined the case law and the monarchy grew stronger. In modern times, the duel is no more than a form of bravado against ordinary law, the duel of the point of honor.

A form of dueling was observed in other societies, in particular in Japan, but it was then a practice reserved for the military. However, by imposing individual weapons of war, that is to say by prohibiting the use of fists, for example, the duel mainly concerned  the nobility, trained in fencing and shooting. The gentlemen ended up condescending to indulge themselves only among themselves: "Game of hands, game of villains". The spirit which governed it thus gave more value to dignity than to life, to manner rather than to interest, and claimed the primacy of individual freedom to regulate its affairs over recourse to public justice. Defended in the past by both supporters of an aristocratic regime and by Republicans, dueling is nowadays prohibited in most countries.

The oldest known form of the duel seems to be the judicial duel practiced by the Ancient Germans, already reported by Caesar. This form has slowly evolved over the centuries to lead to the duel of honor. To settle private disputes, you can fight, the gods will decide. In 502 among the Burgundians, the Gombette law codified the custom and introduced the concept of "champion."

The Church disapproved and fought against a custom deeply rooted in European culture.

The rules were the same everywhere: there is a gesture of defiance, it is noted, the meeting takes place in a closed, delimited place, there is a search to ensure that the combatants are on equal terms, and this is done in front of witnesses and after a religious ceremony.

The defeated duelist, found guilty, was hanged.

In 805 Charlemagne introduced the use of the stick in duels. However the stick would quickly become the weapon of the commoners while the nobles fought with the sword.

The Kings of France opposed it, especially during the 13th century. Saint Louis (Louis IX) in his Great Ordinance of 1254, wanted to return in judicial matters to the evidence by witnesses. Little by little, the nobility began to consider the duel as a way to challenge royal authority, and thereby assert their independence.

Philippe le Bel (Philippe IV) officially reintroduced the judicial duel by restricting it to the most serious crimes, by imposing financial formalities, and prohibiting it in time of war. The number of duels drastically decreased.

On July 10, 1547, the famous duel in Saint-Germain-en-Laye between Guy Chabot de Jarnac and François de La Châtaigneraie brought about the end of the legal duels.

Time for the great hours of the duel of point of honor!

The latter developed following the Italian wars. People defied royal power for any reason. For the most futile reasons, they challenge and killed each other and themselves, because they had to "defend their honor." It was part of the everyday landscape.

The King of France no longer giving permission to fight, people did without it, the legal duel then taking on a new form in the 16th century, the duel of the point of honor. In the desire to brave the growing royal power, they fought for any reason, and if necessary they invented a pretext concerning their honor (private or public) when the desire came to want to simply confront another with weapons in hand . The duel became a fashion, and under the influence of the Italian masters, the sword became its almost exclusive weapon with the dagger and, sometimes, the spear. The witnesses, called "seconds", from passive actors  they were at the start, took more and more part in the duels they were supposed to arbitrate. In 1652, during the duel of the Dukes of Nemours and Beaufort, there were ten people who fought together in the horse market where the meeting took place. Three people were killed and several injured.

It was a massive phenomenon; people fought in the squares of towns and villages, in the streets, especially in the woods. Some places were very famous with duelists. Where is the current Place des Vosges, a large space near the Porte Saint-Antoine was very popular with duelists.

These duels escaped justice and clerical power. The Council of Trent may excommunicate the duellists, nothing helps. In France, between 1588 and 1608, more than 10,000 gentlemen killed themselves in a duel (and that only counts the nobles!), 4,000 in the year 1607 alone according to contemporaries: it is more than the Wars of Religion.

The Kings opposed it; we can note a large number of prohibition edicts, particularly from 1599 (1599, 1602, 1613, 1617, 1623). But they were themselves part of this combative aristocracy, and showed indulgence towards the duellists (Henri IV signed many graces in such circumstances - 7000 in 19 years).

Many nobles stupidly perished in a duel and the ban became a necessity. The state assumed the " monopoly of violence" and determined to tame the nobility. But it was with Richelieu, whose brother had been killed in a duel, that the fight against the duel took a sharp turn (for a moment). Now the duel, assimilated to high treason, was to be punished with death.

On February 6, 1626, Richelieu prohibited dueling.

"Sire, it is a matter of strangling duels or strangling Your Majesty's laws."

No mercy for the duellists, it would be exile or beheading.

And on June 22, 1627 was beheaded François de Montmorency-Bouteville for fighting in broad daylight, Place Royale, against François II d'Harcourt, Marquis de Beuvron, who fled to England. The scandal of a youth killing themselves for frivolous reasons was denounced at the very heart of the Court by the great poet Malherbe whose son, himself a duelist who had received a pardon, was assassinated on July 13, 1627 for having prevented a duel.

The very severe sentence raised a wave of protest from the nobles, but the king and the cardinal did not flinch, and the execution for the example took place.

The repression continued under Louis XIV, Louis XVI .. The duels still existed (even ecclesiastics were fond of them,such as the Cardinal de Retz) they were only more discreet. In the woods, for example. There were areas of lawlessness like the Court of Miracles in Paris, where you could fight.

The Revolution abolished the royal edicts, and the duel made a powerful comeback. Except that it was now democratized: now everyone was fighting. At the fall of the Empire, demobilized officers attacked the Prussians or the legitimists. People were fighting for anything. And anywhere. In 1808, two men fought in balloons above Paris - one of the combatants was shot down and died with his witness. In 1843, two others fought with billiard balls.

In 1834 the Count of Chatauvillard published his Essay on the Duel, a true manual for the duelist.

Everyone was fighting. Debates in the Assembly often ended in a closed field with witnesses. This was the time of the cloak and daggers novels, whose authors themselves fought in duels. All the big names of the time duelled at least once.

Between 1826 and 1834 there were in France more than two hundred dead by duel.

Now for some famous duels of the XIXth century:

On May 31, 1832, Evariste Gallois, 20 years old, very brilliant and promising mathematician, just after having published his theory of ambiguity (which is still studied today), died in a duel with a lieutenant of cavalry who was more experienced than him.

On July 24, 1836, Armand Carrel died while fighting against Emile de Girardin.

A famous pistol duel took place in Saint Petersburg on January 27, 1837, and the great Russian writer Alexandre Pushkin was killed by French Lieutenant Georges d'Anthès.

During the Belle Epoque, highly regulated duels were stopped at first blood. It was a great passion.

We can find among the duelists Ledru-Rollin, Proudhon, Alexandre Dumas, Lamartine, Victor Hugo, Adolphe Thiers, Léon Gambetta, Jules Ferry, Aristide Briand, Léon Blum, Georges Clemenceau (12 personal duels plus 5 as a witness for the Tiger!), Marcel Proust (yes, even him!), and the future presidents Raymond Poincaré and Paul Deschanel.

Men, you might think. Well ... not only!

Without counting the famous Julie d'Aubigny (Mademoiselle de Maupin) with her novel-like life, we can mention the famous duel which in September 1718 opposed two lovers of the Duke of Richelieu (not the Cardinal ... but a descendant of his family), the Marquise de Nesle and the Comtesse de Polignac. They fought for his love and got little for their pains, since the Duke left them both for the Regent's daughter.

The Great War will be a game-changer. It is possible that only something that big could durably affect society to the point it would give up such a long held tradition. After such devastation and the priority given to collective defense rather than individual combat, to die "for honor" suddenly seemed very absurd.

Some nostalgics continued, but the duel fell out of favor.

The last duel in France happened in 1967 between two parliamentarians, Gaston Defferre and René Ribière (because one said to the other in the middle of the Assembly: Shut up, you idiot!)

And nowadays... Some lone voices still talk about dueling.

Sources:

Wikipedia, le Duel (Article in French)

www.defense.gouv.fr

Pariszigzag, l'Histoire Insolite des duels et de leur répression

Ouest France, Edition du Soir, Pourquoi les Français ont adoré les duels ? 3 mai 2017

Infos Toulouse, Le duel: un code d'honneur historique, 9 août 2019