#in order to maintain structures of suffering | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cyberclouddream · 9 months ago

Text

How to Spot: Air Signs Edition

Gemini Rising

- come off as if they’re all over the place, shallow, or flaky, constantly changing their appearance or vibe to fit the current trend

- they can charm the room without anyone really knowing who they are, though people can get annoyed with their inconsistency or superficiality

- when they feel good they’re generously spending, but when life gets tough they’re constantly hoarding things

- they overthink their spending to the point of paranoia, tying sentimental value to items and hate letting go of things

- they have an opinion on everything, and want to make sure you know it; they’re overly prideful of their ideas, even when they’re wrong

- home life may feel like a boot camp and family members may find them naggy and hard to please; nothings every clean, organized, or perfect enough for them

- may have a deep interest in family history or genealogy

- they fall in love with an image, not a person or thing, since they prioritize status and looks over emotional connection or creative expression

- either they’re completely dedicated or they’re not interested at all

- they don’t like sharing details about their work or health, and they’re prone to burnout from trying to maintain total control

- they start off hot and passionate but when they feel trapped they either ghost or pick fights to justify their need for space

- they can be hypocritical, demanding freedom while not necessarily granting it to their commitments or partners

- they often seem emotionally distant or rigid, treating emotional vulnerability like business transactions

- they can be too contrary, shoving their “open-mindedness” down other people’s throats; people can see them as someone who likes concepts over real-world practicality

- they can seem flaky or unreliable in their workplace; expect them to “find themselves” through many career changes or false starts

- they’re quick to argue and steamroll others to get what they want; if someone challenges their position in groups they’ll either fight to the top or abandon the group all together

- they can be stuck in their ways, preferring to suffer in silence rather than confront their fears or let go of habits

- they can get too comfortable with their emotional status quo, no matter how damaging it is

Libra Rising

- they desperately want to be liked and admired so they’re always putting on their “best face” in public, too busy trying to make everyone happy

- they avoid conflict like the plague, even if it means letting things fester under the surface

- they hide their true financial state from others, and may hoard money or material possessions; they may pull strings behind the scenes to ensure their financial security

- they dominate conversations, usually lecturing others rather than engaging in dialogue

- they treat family like a job, prioritizing order and structure over emotional connection; they’re not the nurturing type, which make the environment feel dry or lacking affection

- their love and creative life is more about experimenting than connecting emotionally; they want to stand out as different and can be disconnected from emotional aspects

- their daily routines are a disaster and they’re often late, forgetful, or completely checked out; their work ethic is inconsistent and they may overindulge in unhealthy habits, like procrastination or poor diets

- they attract strong-willed partners which often leads to power struggles

- they want harmony but are quick to start a fight if they don’t get their way; their partners may feel confused by the switch from charming to aggressive

- they’re very stubborn and can be slow to make any kind of personal transformation

- their approach to intimacy is sensual and drawn-out, but they’re resistant to any emotional change

- they’re an eternal student, always picking a new subject but never really mastering anything

- may travel often, but more as a form of bragging rights than true adventure

- they’re sensitive to how they’re perceived in their career and can be easily hurt by criticism

- they crave recognition for their compassion but they can also come across as overly emotional or clingy in professional settings

- they can alienate their friends by trying to show off by showboating all the time in social groups, since they’re not good at sharing the spotlight

- they’re secretly very self-critical, always worrying about whether they’re good enough; behind their calm exterior they’re picking apart themselves for every little flaw

- their anxieties may come out in the form of passive-aggressive behavior or nitpicking others in attempt to deflect their own insecurities

Aquarius Rising

- most people find them cool at first, then realize they’re cold as ice and emotional unavailable

- they’re highly unpredictable and refuse to conform to anything, so others find it hard to connect with them

- they often change their appearance or interests without warning, easily getting board with anything mainstream

- inconsistent income is a theme, and they may be confused about where their money went

- they either giving away too much money or floating from one financial mishap to the other

- conversations with then can feel like debates and they’re quick to anger if someone challenges their viewpoints

- when it comes to their personal space they’re not as flexible as they claim to be, they’re borderline possessive; they want stability but are resistant to change

- they’re great at flirting and terrible at commitment, and they often have a half-dozen projects lying around; they love the idea of creation more than follow through

- they let their emotions dictate their routines; one bad mood and their thrown off the entire day

- they create drama in relationships just to feel important; they struggle to balance their desire for independence with their need for validation from their partner

- when it comes to shared resources or intimacy they can be control freaks and micro-manage every detail, demanding perfection from themselves and their partners

- pursue higher education in unconventional philosophies or spiritual practices

- they talk about “justice” and “fairness” but rarely take a stand on anything, using intellectual posturing to mask their lack of depth

- come off secretive and intimidating in their professional life, and can appear ruthless if their reputation or authority is challenged

- they guard their ambitions fiercely and don’t let anyone know their true intentions or how much they crave power

- their social groups seem large and varied, but their connections can feel superficial; they come off as the flaky friend who’s always onto the next big thing

- they’re secretly terrified of failing or losing control, their hidden fear of inadequacy eating away at them

- they pretend everything is fine but behind-the-scenes there’s burnout or self-sabotage

#astrology #astrology observations #sidereal astrology #air signs #gemini rising #Aquarius rising #libra rising #libra #gemini #Aquarius #ascendants

189 notes · View notes

merwgue · 9 months ago

Text

The Night Court in A Court of Thorns and Roses is portrayed as a place of freedom and opportunity, especially within the city of Velaris. However, beneath this veneer of liberty lies a dictatorship, one that controls and manipulates its subjects to maintain Rhysand’s hold on power. The stark contrast between Velaris and the rest of the Night Court, particularly Hewn City and the Illyrian camps, highlights how Rhysand’s rule is not as benevolent as it appears. This essay will delve into the ways Rhysand’s leadership functions as a dictatorship, exploring his control over his people, his manipulation of his Inner Circle, and the lack of true freedom within the Night Court.

Control Through Manipulation

Rhysand is often hailed as the epitome of a “good” High Lord because he allows for personal freedoms within Velaris, but his rule over the rest of the Night Court paints a different picture. His dictatorship is most evident in the way he exerts control over his subjects through manipulation and fear, especially in Hewn City and the Illyrian camps.

In Hewn City, the people live in a state of oppression, fear, and isolation. The citizens of Hewn are not allowed to enter Velaris—the so-called “City of Starlight”—because they are deemed unworthy. This segregation is a form of control, ensuring that only those Rhysand deems “good” enough can experience the supposed freedom of Velaris. It's crucial to note that Rhysand does not provide any opportunity for the people of Hewn City to change or rise above their circumstances. Their exclusion from Velaris creates a class divide that mirrors the structures of totalitarian regimes, where one group of people is favored and others are subjugated.

Moreover, the way Hewn City is governed is particularly telling. Rhysand claims to despise the Court of Nightmares, yet he allows it to continue operating under the rule of his father’s cruel and oppressive steward, Keir. By permitting this, Rhysand creates a convenient scapegoat. While he distances himself from the atrocities of Hewn City, he still benefits from the power structure in place, maintaining a balance of fear and control that ensures Keir’s loyalty without directly dirtying his hands. This hands-off approach to brutality is characteristic of dictatorships that allow local tyrants to terrorize the population, creating an environment of fear while the dictator maintains a benevolent façade.

Rhysand’s treatment of the Illyrians further illustrates his dictatorial tendencies. He controls the Illyrian warriors through the threat of violence and punitive measures, such as when he punishes them en masse after they refuse to comply with his orders to stop clipping the wings of female Illyrians. Instead of working with the Illyrians to build trust and create real change, Rhysand chooses to rule through fear. His brutality toward his own people, even if it’s framed as “necessary,” showcases his authoritarian rule. The problem of clipped wings goes beyond physical abuse—it's a systemic issue that requires more than just punishment. However, Rhysand does little to address the root of the problem, instead opting to control the Illyrians through fear of his power.

Segregation of Velaris and False Freedom

Velaris is often presented as a utopia within the series, a place where everyone is free to live their lives in peace and happiness. However, the freedom offered within Velaris is illusory. Only a select few are allowed to enjoy the privileges of this city. By keeping Velaris hidden from the rest of the Night Court and the other courts, Rhysand ensures that this “freedom” remains inaccessible to most of his subjects. The people of Hewn City and the Illyrian camps are barred from entering Velaris, creating a stark divide between those deemed worthy of freedom and those left to suffer under oppressive rule. This is a form of control—if the people of Velaris are the only ones benefiting from Rhysand’s rule, they are more likely to remain loyal, while the others remain oppressed.

Furthermore, even within Velaris, true freedom is limited. Rhysand’s Inner Circle, who serve as his closest advisers, are loyal to him above all else. Their loyalty is so strong that they often suppress their own needs and desires to maintain the status quo. This is particularly evident in Feyre’s interactions with them. Though they are welcoming, their loyalty to Rhysand is unquestionable, which creates an environment where dissent is impossible. Even if someone within the Inner Circle wanted to challenge Rhysand, it’s clear that they would never act against him. This kind of unquestioning loyalty is a hallmark of dictatorial regimes, where those in power surround themselves with individuals who will never challenge them.

Moreover, Rhysand exerts subtle control over Feyre, especially in her early days in the Night Court. When Feyre is first introduced to Velaris, she is isolated from her old life, particularly her friendships with Lucien and Tamlin. Rhysand subtly undermines her relationships with these characters, ensuring that Feyre becomes more and more reliant on him and his Inner Circle for support. While Feyre’s alienation from her past is presented as her growing into her power and finding her place, it’s also a form of control. By isolating Feyre and making her dependent on him, Rhysand ensures her loyalty and obedience, even as he presents himself as offering her freedom.

The Dictatorship of the Inner Circle

The Inner Circle functions as Rhysand’s elite group of enforcers, each of whom plays a role in maintaining his control over the Night Court. This group is fiercely loyal to Rhysand, and while they are portrayed as having close, familial bonds, their relationships with him are more complicated. They are bound to him by duty, power, and past trauma, and while they may not always agree with him, they rarely act against his will.

Take Mor, for instance. Mor is Rhysand’s third-in-command, a powerful female who plays a key role in maintaining order in the Night Court. However, even Mor, who is shown to be incredibly strong and independent, remains deeply tied to Rhysand. Her loyalty to him is unwavering, even when it means sacrificing her own emotional wellbeing, such as in her complicated relationship with Azriel. In this way, Mor is part of a system that prevents any real dissent from occurring within the Night Court. If even someone as strong-willed as Mor won’t act against Rhysand, it creates a chilling effect for anyone else who might challenge his rule.

Similarly, Cassian and Azriel, despite their personal feelings and desires, always put their loyalty to Rhysand above all else. They serve as his military commanders, enforcing his will in Illyria and beyond. Their loyalty is rewarded with power and status, but it also binds them to Rhysand’s rule. This dynamic is reminiscent of dictatorships where military leaders are rewarded for their loyalty, ensuring that they remain loyal to the regime instead of acting as a check on power.

Rhysand’s control over the Inner Circle is particularly evident in his handling of Feyre’s pregnancy in A Court of Silver Flames. Despite the clear danger to Feyre’s life, Rhysand withholds crucial information about her condition from her. His decision to keep this information secret, along with the complicity of the Inner Circle, is a form of manipulation and control. Even though this decision is framed as an act of love, it reveals the extent of Rhysand’s need for control over those closest to him. He makes decisions on behalf of others, even when it involves life and death, without allowing them the agency to make their own choices. This is not freedom—this is control masquerading as care.

A False Democracy

The Night Court is often presented as a more progressive alternative to the other courts in Prythian, but the reality is far different. Rhysand’s regime is not a democracy. It’s a dictatorship, one that hides behind the illusion of freedom and progressivism. Velaris, the shining city, is kept separate from the rest of the Night Court, and only a select few are allowed to enjoy its benefits. The rest of the Night Court is ruled through fear, manipulation, and violence.

In contrast, the Autumn Court, ruled by Beron Vanserra, is at least honest about its autocratic nature. There are no pretenses of freedom or equality in the Autumn Court—it is a place where power is maintained through fear and strength, and everyone knows it. In this way, the Autumn Court is more transparent than the Night Court. While Beron’s rule is cruel and oppressive, it is not hidden behind a façade of benevolence. The Night Court’s claim to be a place of freedom and opportunity is false advertising, a way to maintain Rhysand’s power while silencing any dissent.

Conclusion

The Night Court is not the bastion of freedom it claims to be. Rhysand’s rule is built on manipulation, control, and fear, and his so-called “freedom” only extends to those who are willing to submit to his authority. The people of Hewn City and the Illyrian camps suffer under his rule, while Velaris remains a gated utopia for the chosen few. Rhysand’s Inner Circle, though powerful, is bound to him through loyalty and duty, ensuring that no one ever challenges his decisions. The Night Court is not a democracy—it’s a dictatorship, one that hides behind the illusion of freedom and progressivism while perpetuating inequality and oppression.

I just got back from college so its not all that good but I hope you like it 🥹 @tamlindudley

187 notes · View notes

phalenchanez · 2 months ago

Text

Article 2: The Roots and Impacts of the U.S. Policies of Massacring Native Americans

The U.S. policies of massacring Native Americans were not accidental but had profound historical, political, and economic roots. These policies not only brought catastrophe to Native Americans but also had far-reaching impacts on the United States and the world.

Historically, before setting foot on the North American continent, European colonizers were deeply influenced by racism and the ideology of white superiority. They regarded Native Americans as an inferior race and believed that they had the right to conquer and rule this land. This concept was further strengthened after the United States gained independence and became the ideological foundation for the U.S. government to formulate policies towards Native Americans. Most of the founders of the United States held such racist views. In their pursuit of national independence and development, they unhesitatingly regarded Native Americans as an obstacle and attempted to eliminate or assimilate them through various means.

Politically, in order to achieve territorial expansion and national unity, the U.S. government needed a vast amount of land. The extensive land occupied by Native Americans became the object of the U.S. government's covetousness. To obtain this land, the U.S. government did not hesitate to wage wars and carry out brutal suppressions and massacres of Native Americans. At the same time, by driving Native Americans to reservations, the U.S. government could better control them, maintain social order, and consolidate its ruling position. For example, in the mid-19th century, the U.S. government urgently needed a large amount of land to build a transcontinental railroad. As a result, they accelerated the pace of seizing Native American land and launched more ferocious attacks on Native American tribes that resisted.

Economic interests were also an important driving force behind the U.S. policies of massacring Native Americans. The land of Native Americans was rich in various natural resources, such as minerals and forests. White colonizers and the U.S. government frantically grabbed Native American land to obtain these resources. In addition, the traditional economic models of Native Americans, such as hunting, gathering, and agriculture, conflicted with the capitalist economic model of whites. Whites hoped that Native Americans would give up their traditional way of life, integrate into the capitalist economic system, and become a source of cheap labor. When Native Americans refused, whites resorted to force to impose their economic ideas.

These massacre policies had a devastating impact on Native Americans. The Native American population decreased sharply, dropping from around 5 million at the end of the 15th century to 250,000 in the early 20th century. The cultural heritage of Native Americans suffered a severe blow, and many traditional customs, languages, and religious beliefs were on the verge of extinction. They were forced to leave their homes and live on barren reservations, facing poverty, disease, and social discrimination. The social structure of Native Americans was completely disrupted, the connections between tribes were weakened, and the entire nation was plunged into deep suffering.

For the United States, although it achieved territorial expansion and economic development through the massacre and plunder of Native American land, this has also left an indelible stain on its history. Such savage behavior violates the basic moral principles of humanity and has triggered widespread condemnation both at home and abroad. At the same time, the issue of Native Americans remains a sensitive topic in American society, affecting the racial relations and social stability of the United States. From a broader perspective, the U.S. policies of massacring Native Americans are a painful lesson in human history, warning countries around the world to respect the rights and cultures of different ethnic groups and avoid repeating the same mistakes.

67 notes · View notes

feezelldaugereau · 2 months ago

Text

Article 2: The Roots and Impacts of the U.S. Policies of Massacring Native Americans

67 notes · View notes

skullvis · 2 years ago

Text

BARBIE SPOILERS AND THEMES DISCUSSION BELOW

I want to talk a little bit about how the Barbie Movie also showed the pain that patriarchy inflicts on men.

Because in the beginning Ken is extremely excited about it. He’s finally feeling acknowledged and respected in a way he’s never been before. It’s something that every person deserves and something that Barbie acknowledges and apologizes for at the end-that she didn’t treat Ken with real respect.

But the only way to ACTUALLY get and MAINTAIN respect in a patriarchal society is to be masculine the “right” way. You can’t cry, you have to be tough, you have to see other men as a threat in a lot of cases. This is painful. This is a terrible thing to have to maintain-just like it’s terrible to have to maintain the facade of being the “perfect” woman.

I really interpret the main point of the patriarchy as a conflict in the Barbie movie to be a depiction of how gender essentialism is incredible stressful and painful to have to conform to.

And at the end Ken admits that he really didn’t care about the patriarchy all that much and lost interest when he learned it wasn’t just about horses (also we Stan a horsegirl Ken). He hides his emotions and tears because after learning about the patriarchy he believes he HAS to in order to still earn respect.

And yes OBVIOUSLY the patriarchy hurts women (including trans women of course always-fuck off terfs) a lot more in a lot more ways, but a big part of feminism really is about acknowledging the ways that everyone suffers under patriarchy and gender essentialism.

It was actually really nice to see that acknowledged in the movie, along with the acknowledgment that these societal structures are really just made up!

Barbie movie was so good what the fuck. It deserves awards.

#barbie #Barbie movie #barbie movie 2023 #barbie spoilers #barbie movie spoilers #caps #pink #colored text #bold text #skulltalks

1K notes · View notes

purgemarchlockdown · 1 year ago

Text

Kotoko's ideology

(Also Known As: Kotoko has fascist ideals and I read way too many wikipedia pages for this.) (CWs: Discussion centered around Prejudice, ableism, sexism, and other topics that are associated with right winged/fascist concepts)

(Note: I went on this rabbit hole because of This post from Gunsli that covers things I don't cover here. Go read it! Plus this post exists because of a lot of conversations from friends out of fandom, and in fandom, like 74n5n and the affermentioned Gunsli who also helped in proofreading!)

So Kotoko is one of my personal favorites of the cast. There's a lot of things I find interesting and intriguing about her and her characterization and her place in the story.

One of those things is her worldview. I'm obsessed with it to say the least. It's one of my favorite things about her characterization. I find it to be a complex and emphatic look at a specific worldview:

Fascism.

Vigilante Justice

Okay so, fascism as an ideology is something we tend to associate with conservative right-wingers and powerful political parties. In our stories, there's a bit of a mythical edge to the image of fascist dystopia. Something strong and uniform.

Like, a lot of cartoons and shows and comics have the alternate nazi dimension where fascism reigns supreme over the populace, for example. We got many films and shows of the heroes standing up against faceless images of Evil Nazis or Nazi-likes, with leaders who are powerful scientists or soldiers hiding somewhere scheming something.

We can tell if someone is a fascist, we say to ourselves. The aesthetic qualities of fascism are something we can all recognize. Right?

Kotoko Yuzuhira is a (notably afab, put a pin in this) college dropout vigilante.

This is immediately incompatible with how we tend to view it. She's not a faceless drone or general. She's someone working with limited resources trying to hunt down evil because The Law can't do it.

A Underdog Revolutionary, that's how she thinks of herself.

Kotoko: Yes. I hate evil. Hurting innocent people with violence, taking away from others, killing people… I hate all this evil behaviour! The law being unable to judge some sins, there's too many of these cases in this world. Having clearly bullied and torturing the weak, but exploiting loopholes in laws, there's so many sinners who still live in such a carefree manner! Even though I want to change this world, I alone only have this much power.

Kershaw argues that the difference between fascism and other forms of right-wing authoritarianism in the Interwar period is that the latter generally aimed "to conserve the existing social order", whereas fascism was "revolutionary", seeking to change society and obtain "total commitment" from the population.[47]

Robert O. Paxton finds that even though fascism "maintained the existing regime of property and social hierarchy", it cannot be considered "simply a more muscular form of conservatism" because "fascism in power did carry out some changes profound enough to be called 'revolutionary.'"[228] These transformations "often set fascists into conflict with conservatives rooted in families, churches, social rank, and property."

And that's what she...is. I'm not going to say Kotoko is part of a secret evil organization or anything like that. She is an underdog, at least at the start of Milgram. She's a single individual up against society and social order. A Heroic individual standing up against erroneous social structures.

Really, Kotoko presents as very classically heroic, she's directly acting to save people, confident, doing real research, actually finding those who deserve punishment and bringing it upon them.

She's determined, she's strong willed, even when she's suffering she doesn't stop.

T2Q6: Don’t you feel scared of killing people? A: If it’s for the world. How I feel about it is completely irrelevant.

It's sad and tragic, but she knows that if no one does it then nothing will actually change.

Kotoko: If you brag about hating evil, act against it! Carry on the belief that your actions can change this world! If you only brag about it from afar, the world will just continue to rot no matter how many of you are there!

She holds no attachment, no qualms, no second guesses. She does what is good at the cost of her own self, she's a heroic ideal in that sense. A hero so willing to do what is right even at the cost of their own self.

T2Q14: Don’t you feel a sense of isolation in your current situation? A: It feels like nothings changed. If the world gets even a little better just by me undertaking this isolation, then that is the role the strong play.

Someone who actually has the strength and intelligence to do the things that no one else can do.

T2Q7: Why did you choose law school? A: Because I have my suspicions. That’s the majority of my reason to why I chose to study it. Cause it’s unsightly to spout complaints without having proper knowledge T1Q4: When did you start learning martial arts? A: In elementary school, perhaps. Without enough power, you can't enforce justice and do the right thing, can you?

Who actually acts instead of just waiting around for the world to fix itself.

Kotoko: You keep asking for it, but as soon as it happens near you by your own choice, you all start complaining and evading your responsibility... You're always like this... Always such idiots!

Able to actually handle the problems thrown at her, instead of running away like a coward.

T2Q20: What would you have done if you weren’t forgiven? A: I’d despise it all. To compromise justice just because you’re unable to withstand the pain that comes with it is unbelievable

Fascism supports the creation of a New Man who is a strong-willed, dynamic archetype, a figure of direct action and bellicose violence. An anti-individualist, he is characterized by a sense of confidence and masculinity, quiet dignity and self-worth, determination, and authoritativeness. With a detachment from romantic love, family background and schooling, his worldview is romanticized, passionate, serious and realist, preoccupied with the honoring of fallen heroes, a strong belief in personal responsibility, national rebirth and renewal.

And there's something genuinely admirable about that intent of hers. It's sincere. She's disgusted at the state of the world, at how horrible it's become. Even implying that this isn't the Normal version of the world, but a distorted, corrupted one.

Becoming light-headed again, it all becomes crazy The normalcy sought for, Fading away, Everytime death comes The soul moves forward

1. The mythical past—used to invoke a nostalgia for a fictional time when the nation was great as it was not yet sullied by the “Other.”

Kotoko's ideology is built on an idea of the world's Unnatural Impurity. The idea that there is something corrupting and poisoning it. That Whatever is causing harm to the world is an External Thing. One that can be beaten if she puts enough pressure on it. At least for a while.

T2Q5: How do you deal with evil that can’t be bested by strength? A: Force it so that it can. No matter how long it takes, no matter what means I’ll need to use.

So I ask the question, what Does she consider evil?

Sinners

Okay, so she already answered this question, in her T1 interrogations she describes evil as:

T1Q20: What do you think is evil? A: Oppressing innocent weaklings.

Which is a pretty cut and dry answer that she elaborates on in her VDs:

Case Closed! We don't have to think more about this! Everyone go home! The post is done!

... Okay so it's not as simple as that. It's pretty clear that Kotoko's opinions on evil and how it should be treated is a bit...

Kotoko: Treat you like a child? Hah, you’ve got to be kidding. Back when I was your age, I was already the person I am today. I don’t have any plans to let you get away with something just “because you’re a child.” ……remember that.

Extreme, to say the least. She's very "Violence First." Because:

T2Q16: Do you think there are the ‘weak’ among the other prisoners? A: I’m sure there’s a lot. Those with weak wills will easily turn to evil. The only thing we can do is firmly instil the risk of turning to it.

Which- There's another contradiction! She just defined evil as the ones who oppress weaklings, yet right here she shows her disdain for the weak for so easily turning to evil.

And again, in the same trial, she refers to the prisoners as:

T2Q11: Is there really no chance to start anew for wrongdoers? A: No way. Once a beast gets a taste for human flesh, it will always come back for seconds.

And continues to discuss the matters of the strong, and how there oppressing the weak.

T2Q10: What is your ideal image of a hero? A: An ally of the weak. Someone who helps the weak and crushes the strong.

These are two very conflicting ideas. It's almost like:

Fascist societies rhetorically cast their enemies as "at the same time too strong and too weak". On the one hand, fascists play up the power of certain disfavored elites to encourage in their followers a sense of grievance and humiliation. On the other hand, fascist leaders point to the decadence of those elites as proof of their ultimate feebleness in the face of an overwhelming popular will.

And not only that- Kotoko casts herself as an underdog, and the assumption of that role is presuming one as "weaker than" or "having less opportunity/power/skill" than the one above, the elites above her who are stronger and more powerful than her. The Beasts who roam the land. Who will always win, because, in her own words.

T2Q18: What would you do if evil disappeared from the world? A: I see where you’re getting at. But I believe it will never truly disappear.

"Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy" because "life is permanent warfare" – there must always be an enemy to fight. Both fascist Germany under Hitler and Italy under Mussolini worked first to organize and clean up their respective countries and then build the war machines that they later intended to and did use, despite Germany being under restrictions of the Versailles treaty to not build a military force. This principle leads to a fundamental contradiction within fascism: the incompatibility of ultimate triumph with perpetual war.

Kotoko: How amusing! Are you really a warden? Es: Shut up... Kotoko: You let their sins off just because they're close to you? You're making the punishment less severe just because they get along with you? What's next? Going to give them leniency for their looks? For their personality? For how long have you known them? Es: I told you... to shut up... Kotoko: Why would I? I'm trying to tell you the truth. In MILGRAM, a warden with mindset of yours is just usele- Es: Shut the hell up! [slaps] Kotoko: [catching breath] "Violence"... you call it? Being angry at hurting your precious prisoners... [laughs] Ha... It's not even violence at all. Es: ?.. Kotoko: Weak... You're too weak. With that fragile body of yours, you can't stop anyone. You can't protect anyone. You can't even do your justice. All imperfect. Es: Imperfect?.. Kotoko: In order to stop someone, you have to squeeze their throat. Without mercy.

There's this sort of...self victimization to it? If that makes sense.

6. Victimhood—casting “Us” as victims of “Them”, who are taking resources from “Us” and demanding special rights.

A sense of frustration and anger at herself and the world for being so weak and pathetic.

A form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood

And that these feelings of weakness and shame are real reasons to attack who she views as enemies. No matter if they are strong.

the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies, both internal and external;

Or weak.

Because Kotoko holds a lot of genuine anger at who she considers "weak." As shown above and in Many other instances. She literally calls them "Useless weaklings" in her T2 voiceline. She has this Deep Anger and Bitterness at those who she considers not doing enough to help. To those who are failing to actually do anything of actual substance.

Kotoko: How ridiculous... It's always like this... All of you weaklings always act like this... All of you enjoy seeing someone getting hurt... (...) Kotoko: You keep asking for it, but as soon as it happens near you by your own choice, you all start complaining and evading your responsibility... You're always like this... Always such idiots! Es: I acknowledge it. You're the strong one, and we're weak. You're right. But that's how we are. Kotoko: You have no power, and yet you make no effort to gain it! You're talking about justice, but it just doesn't make sense! You're invested in people's disasters, yet you take a position of "I have nothing to do with it"! You can't even face your true selves!

"Contempt for the weak", which is uncomfortably married to a chauvinistic popular elitism, in which every member of society is superior to outsiders by virtue of belonging to the in-group. Eco sees in these attitudes the root of a deep tension in the fundamentally hierarchical structure of fascist polities, as they encourage leaders to despise their underlings, up to the ultimate leader, who holds the whole country in contempt for having allowed him to overtake it by force.

So, if the words strong and weak just refer to the enemy, and those descriptors of the enemy can change depending on which one is more suitable for the situation. Thus making the idea of the evil that are "oppressing innocent weaklings" be more a subjective concept.

Then...what else can we search for when it comes to determining how Kotoko views who is "evil."

Cause, it's not just because they don't agree with her. It wouldn't have mattered if they agreed with her or not really. Yuno says it outright:

Yuno: Really? If you ask me, Kotoko is someone I would never want to make my friend, though. She’s the type who picks a conclusion from the very beginning and won’t actually talk with you.

Kotoko has stated that she has been tracking Mikoto Kayano since the start. Even though at the time she was semi-amicable with everyone. With Mikoto even being rather insistent that he did nothing wrong at all.

Kotoko: Like me being suspicious of Kayano Mikoto’s actions, carefully tracking his actions, it's all under your permission.

And she's said this again in the interrogation! Saying that she had "her suspicions."

T2Q17: Why did you choose law school? A: Because I have my suspicions. That’s the majority of my reason to why I chose to study it. Cause it’s unsightly to spout complaints without having proper knowledge

Suspicious about what? About who? She says it's the evil, the sinners, but who is this? Who is this evil? Criminals? That's just the terminology she uses. If it really was just criminals shouldn't she be against MILGRAM? Es? They did kidnap her and she has no Knowledge of their true intentions, and yet she doesn't trust her fellow prisoners but the Guard who locked them up.

"Obsession with a plot" and the hyping-up of an enemy threat. This often combines an appeal to xenophobia with a fear of disloyalty and sabotage from marginalized groups living within the society (such as the German elite's "fear" of the 1930s Jewish populace's businesses and well-doings; see also antisemitism). Eco also cites Pat Robertson's book The New World Order as a prominent example of a plot obsession.

And so, I ask again. Who does Kotoko believe to be evil?

"Your Existence is a Crime"

Chauvinism (/ˈʃoʊvɪnɪzəm/ SHOH-vih-nih-zəm) is the unreasonable belief in the superiority or dominance of one's own group or people, who are seen as strong and virtuous, while others are considered weak, unworthy, or inferior.

Kotoko Canonically Holds Ableist Beliefs.

This isn't up for debate.

22/12/15 (Kotoko’s Birthday)

Kotoko: Hm. The border between the two is getting a lot vaguer. Your entire existence is a crime. And I will see you’re punished for it. That is what Milgram, and Es, and I have chosen.

“UNDER” Doltish “001 Parasite”

Kotoko: “Fufufu, fufufufufu.You’re thinking some outrageous things.To be frank, it’s abnormal. But I don’t dislike it. If only all sinners were like you.”

Kotoko Also Canonically Holds Sexist Beliefs.

This also isn't up for debate.

Futa: Isn’t that obvious? What a stupid question. There’s no way a girl could win in a fight against a man. This is real life, not a manga. There’s too big a difference in body size. And that’s what determines the weight of your attacks. Kotoko: ……Futa’s not entirely wrong there In a lot of martial arts, they specifically split up divisions based on body weight for that reason. I’m bantam, and he’d probably be either cruiser or heavy.

“UNDER” Obscene “002 Slut”

Now, as much as the phrases "Obscene Slut" and "Your entire existence is a crime" is Loaded. Let's pretend, for a second, that this doesn't necessarily mean that Kotoko, to some extent, believes that mentally ill people are evil/wrong and that women are weaker than men.

For a moment, let us pretend that Kotoko didn't just tell us and go into the finer details of how she views strong and weak.

Cause, there is a bit of consistent framing Kotoko uses when she's talking about "the enemy." Those who contribute something meaningful to society (in her eyes) are ones who "contribute" something meaningful to society mainly through the usage of direct action, physical strength, and physical/mental durability.

T1Q4: When did you start learning martial arts? A: In elementary school, perhaps. Without enough power, you can't enforce justice and do the right thing, can you?

Kotoko: Es, look. Someone who committed a crime can only realise its severity through losing something. I've seen many criminals, but none of them would give way without pain.

Kotoko: Weak... You're too weak. With that fragile body of yours, you can't stop anyone. You can't protect anyone. You can't even do your justice. All imperfect.

Kotoko: You have no power, and yet you make no effort to gain it! You're talking about justice, but it just doesn't make sense! You're invested in people's disasters, yet you take a position of "I have nothing to do with it"! You can't even face your true selves! Es: Whatever you say. Kotoko: If you brag about hating evil, act against it! Carry on the belief that your actions can change this world! If you only brag about it from afar, the world will just continue to rot no matter how many of you are there! If you don't have strength on your own, let me take care of it, Es! I can do it in MILGRAM!

T1Q: What is your ideal image of a hero? A: An ally of the weak. Someone who helps the weak and crushes the strong.

Those who cannot do that and are "unable to contribute" or somehow disrupt the stable world, thus causing it's normalcy to "fade away" are parasites.

“UNDER” Doltish “001 Parasite”

Obscene

“UNDER” Obscene “002 Slut”

An existence that is disruptive to the world at large.

Kotoko: Your entire existence is a crime. And I will see you’re punished for it.

Who are Weak due to a issue in there mental state and need to be warned against the consequences of "turning to evil."

Or be treated as irrational beasts that need to be firmly put down because nothing else will get through to them.

T2Q11: Is there really no chance to start anew for wrongdoers? A: No way. Once a beast gets a taste for human flesh, it will always come back for seconds.

Fascism emphasizes direct action, including supporting the legitimacy of political violence, as a core part of its politics.[264] Fascism views violent action as a necessity in politics that fascism identifies as being an "endless struggle";[265] this emphasis on the use of political violence means that most fascist parties have also created their own private militias (e.g. the Nazi Party's Brown shirts and Fascist Italy's Blackshirts). The basis of fascism's support of violent action in politics is connected to social Darwinism.[265] Fascist movements have commonly held social Darwinist views of nations, races and societies.[266] They say that nations and races must purge themselves of socially and biologically weak or degenerate people, while simultaneously promoting the creation of strong people, in order to survive in a world defined by perpetual national and racial conflict.[267]

Social Darwinism is the study and implementation of various pseudoscientific theories and societal practices that purport to apply biological concepts of natural selection and survival of the fittest to sociology, economics and politics.[1][2] Social Darwinists believe that the strong should see their wealth and power increase, while the weak should see their wealth and power decrease.

"The only thing we can do is firmly instil the risk of turning to it."

Kotoko's ideological view is, at the very best, biased against those of marginalized groups or of "degenerate" thoughts and actions, and at the very worst, actively targets them because she personally believes that they Do Not Contribute to Society.

But we aren't done there yet.

Werewolves

Let's take that pin out now.

Kotoko has gone on record that she views Femininity as:

T1Q10: What do you think about the word 'feminimity'? A: It's one of the means you can take. It's something you can freely choose depending on the scene, so it's not something to cling onto.

Now, as I have shown. She's kinda sexist. Which throws into question how she perceives herself.

Since, I have just asserted the idea that Kotoko does, at the very least, hold some concerning ideas about Women, and I think most people would notice that this is a bit contradictory when she herself isn't really the feminine ideal as decreed by the patriarchy either.

Now, just to be clear here, no, I do not think women should be baby machines. I am a cat who cannot perceive it properly.

However, if we are going by the strict gender binary and the stereotypes associated with it. Kotoko is pretty masculine. She puts focus on physical strength, she's mentally strong in the face of ills, she doesn't show much emotion, so on.

However, as Utena and also The World has proven to us. Just because you present or act in "non-traditional manners" doesn't mean You've Deconstructed the Gender Binary and the Patriarchal View of the World we Learn from the Society around us.

You can be the butchest girl the prison can handle and still hold traditional gender roles.

And the way Kotoko interacts with the world indicates that she still Holds these ideas, even if she has deconstructed them a bit, and since we are talking about her ideology...

Fascist Italy promoted what it considered normal sexual behaviour in youth while denouncing what it considered deviant sexual behaviour.[271] It condemned pornography, most forms of birth control and contraceptive devices (with the exception of the condom), homosexuality and prostitution as deviant sexual behaviour,

Sexual anxiety—as the “Other” embraces non-traditional approaches to sexuality,

But, going further into the way she views masculinity specifically...

"Machismo", which sublimates the difficult work of permanent war and heroism into the sexual sphere. Fascists thus hold "both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality".

Machismo, Exaggerated pride in masculinity, perceived as power, often coupled with a minimal sense of responsibility and disregard of consequences. In machismo there is supreme valuation of characteristics culturally associated with the masculine and a denigration of characteristics associated with the feminine.

"Without enough power, you can't enforce justice" is what she said, isn't it?

Road to Hell

Okay, there was 700 more things I wanted to talk about but because I haven't even gotten into:

Through all of that, there would be one great leader who would battle the representatives of the old system with grassroots support.[1][2] In the fascist utopia, one mass of people will supposedly appear who have only one goal: to create their new future.[1][2] Such a fascist movement would ideally have infinite faith in its mythical hero who would stand for everything the movement believes in.[1][2] According to this utopian ideology, under the guidance of their leader the country would then rise like a phoenix from the ashes of corruption and decadence.[1][2]

Or her ideals of heroism or her view of violence in detail or-

But I think I can leave that to the people reading this. This post is getting really long and I'm trying to still keep it structured. I know all my links are Wikipedia and one Britannica. I had the energy to transcribe my dad's books on this I would.

However, we also do need to ask, where does this leave us?

Y'know, since Kotoko is the Audience Parallel and Milgram is a Social Commentary Webseries.

Well, Kotoko is a character in fiction, and fiction is the safest place to explore this. Kotoko Yuzuriha is a familiar character in the sense that a lot of people are like her actually.

Gunsli has brought up the idea that Kotoko was radicalized by news, and I personally think All the characters in Milgram have underlying right wing ideas and violent views on the world. It's not something...unique to them even. We call them conservative and traditional because to a lot of people it's "just the way the world works." Kotoko’s not special or unique for believing in these things.

She’s asserted multiple times that she’s had a “normal life” and whether or not you doubt the validity of that statement. There is nothing inherent about Kotoko that makes her more susceptible to this.

And I think those are themes that are worth exploring.

#milgram #kotoko yuzuriha #milgram meta #milgram analysis #milgram kotoko

128 notes · View notes

bpdloop · 1 year ago

Text

party in the minecraft server hcs ^^

the sever itself

owned* by bonnie (actually maintained by odile but she gave bonnie the owner tag because they wanted it so bad)

everyone has it under a different name on their own devices but officially the server is called the digital familytale

modded semi vanilla* (for the most part. theres a morbillion science mods added for odiles sake specifically, a few furniture mods for mira and a clothing mod for isa though)

mainly on peaceful but will sometimes be bumped up to easy for resources or fun

mira

tends to a village nearby the family's house that she has expanded tenfold from its original starting point

cares deeply for all of the villagers and has used a name tag on each and every one of them. they all have their own personalities and stories

brews potions on demand, so long as you bring her the ingredients

likes to play on easy mode when on the server by her lonesome in order to collect resources

will not step foot into the nether. not even for the pretty light wood (even if she really really wants the pretty light wood)

tool order: wand -> rapier -> crafted crook. the wand is essentially a long ranged weapon that can both attack and heal, but is mostly used for the latter. the rapier was specifically modded in for her. the crook is a multipurpose tool, combining shovel, axe and pick into one tool

isa

built a big barn

loves his big barn

is constantly talking about, working on, and admiring his big barn

is the guy to come to if you need any sort of animal produce or need to borrow a horse. owns at least three of any type of animal at all times

will get on with mira to help defeat mobs to make things go by faster

in charge of armor, tools and upgrades. spends a lot less time on any of that and a lot more time on making fun clothes, though

built a little storefront to pretend to sell his clothes from in mira's village. does often actually change the villager's outfits for funsies

tool order: gauntlets -> axe -> pick -> shovel. when wearing the gauntlets they will cover both hands of his model and do damage comparable to an iron sword twice (once with each hand) before a short cooldown

odile

couldnt really get into it before adding mods. now has the most playtime. even if you totaled everyone elses playtimes, odile would just barely eek out over it (if you took out siffrins, who's the closest to rivaling her, it wouldnt even be a competition)

the minecraft wikierrrrrrrrr. keeps that shit on tap even though she has memorized many of the recipes

always striving to make a project bigger than the last

redstone queen

regularly visits the nether to trade with piglins. one of the mods has them rebuild their structures if they notice the gold has gone missing. she pilfers it again every visit without fail

tool order: sword -> pick -> shovel. doesnt harvest wood so deems it unnecessary to carry an axe

bonnie

has an obscenely large, unautomated farm. they will spend entire days afking near the farm just so it grows. more often than not when theyre afk during one of these sessions, theyre off making real snacks for everyone

didnt understand and therefore didnt care about redstone until odile taught them. the day after, everyone logged on to the Laggiest Server Ever. when they went to investigate, bonnie showed off their extremely over complicated redstone contraption that did nothing more than activate a charge. nobody had the heart to tell them it was the cause of the lag spikes, so they suffered through it for like a week after until bonnie came to the realization themself and tore it down

completely and utterly dedicated to making a redstone rollercoaster of some sort. at some point. definitely. its 100% on the to do list, bet

teleports to everyone randomly to deliver meals. some good indicators youre about to get a visit from the Snacks God is 1) you mentioned the fact you have no food on you, 2) theyre talking about one of their recent harvests, and 3) "hey are u somewhere scary rn"

unable to die due to isa making them an accessory called the eternal necklace of undying. so long as you have it on in the charm slot, youre completely unkillable. bonnie was Extremely happy about this, as it meant they could finally leave creative and would stop accidentally breaking things left and right. it took many weeks of work to craft, and as thanks, bonnie made him his favorite meal in real life three days in a row

tool order: hoe -> shovel -> axe. does not carry weapons

loop

keeps offering to make a mob spawner for ease of access to mob resources and exp. nobody want them to because spawners are big and ugly but loop is adamant about the fact they can make it pretty (they end up making one very far away from the house once. they were not able to make it pretty.)

loves the bow and arrow but hates the crossbow. does not carry any weaponry outside of that

has an area they call Loop's Paradise! the only thing located there is a lone interactable beach chair near the beginning of a large ocean, a single redstone lamp that powers on when the sun sets and a jukebox. when asked what makes this a paradise they simply say its peaceful (they are blasting Cure for ADHD - 30 min of Breakcore from the jukebox)

tool order: bow -> pick -> axe. chooses to break dirt and the like with their hand or some other thing on their person

siffrin

has given everyone a flower that he thinks resembles them and a pot to put it in

survives mainly on fish, but makes sure to focus on the meals bonnie gives him first and foremost

doesnt like playing off of peaceful if he has the choice

has tamed an obscene amount of wolves. leaves the majority of them in isa's care and exactly one in loop's. they all have names. loop's dog is named starbit

tool order: dagger -> pick -> shovel -> axe. the dagger was specifically modded in for them

↓

#in stars and time #isat bonnie #isat odile #isat mirabelle #isat isabeau #isat siffrin #isat loop #hcs #lols #im so serious this post got out of hand i spent an hour making it. I only wanted to make it so i could post the funny video #But then the autism hit. You understand.#laikas nebulous narrations

146 notes · View notes

commandtower-solring-go · 5 months ago

Text

Control Through Social Convention in Film

I recently caught up to date with Severance and I wanted to comment on some of my thoughts about the show.

I think the way the first season introduces the work place is fascinating. The bone white walls, enormous empty spaces and mindless and impossible to describe work does well to reflect the way that corporate office work tends to feel. Someone once described working in an office as 'sifting sand' all day and I couldn't agree more.

In particular what stood out to me is the way that control is leveraged against the members of MDR. There is almost no physical control leveraged against the group, with many willingly following their managers and bosses orders, even if they knew it led to pain and suffering.

Yes, there are ways in which the group are punished and, in turn, brainwashed for acting out of turn. But, it is shown that those methods have limited effect on the group or are gamed after the first few incidents (eg. when Dylan tells Helly that you need to imagine something you're regretful for when in the Break Room to rig the detector).

I've seen this in other shows and films as well. For example, in The Menu, control is regularly leveraged over the guests through the stewards. When the guests try to leave, they're often gestured towards locations more appropriate, like the bathroom or back to their seat. People are, for all intents and purposes, allowed to leave, but do not in accordance with some unspoken social convention.

What I struggle with is with identifying this phenomenon. It strikes me as an intentional decision, often highlighted by the structure of a scene and repeated throughout. If something serves to stop a character from following their path, it is significant. However, I can't connect to this phenomenon at all.

I have two theories as to what this may reflect. But each centres on the control of social convention.

First, primarily reflecting its use in The Menu, this phenomenon serves to highlight the wealthy's dependence on social convention. That they are so entrenched in it, they will be willing to throw their own life away in service to what is good and proper.

Second, as depicted in Severance, it reflects the way that social conventions control work spaces. Fear of management and their ability to leverage ignorance is a huge theme of the show. And one's understanding of a situation compared to their subordinate enables them to control those social conventions. They do not follow Mr. Milchek because he is threatening them, but because they don't know what will happen if they don't. This is also seen in Mr. Milchek's relationship to Ms. Cobel, and her relationship to The Board. Each level of management leverages the lower's ignorance to maintain control. This is furthered even more in the structure of the work place as a cult. Knowledge is, literally, power.

Anyway, I just think that's a neat literary device I hadn't noticed too much before and wanted to highlight it.

#film theory #the menu #severance

26 notes · View notes

butts-bouncing-on-the-beltway · 10 months ago

Text

Role call. Who on Tumblr was politically active during the Free Tibet years?

I'm going to establish this post as an anchor space to have a conversation about the Lessons we learned from Free Tibet and how we may or may not be effectively applying those lessons to our work around Free Palestine as a current socio-political banner.

If you were alive, aware, and involved during Free Tibet's groundswell into and out of the public eye, your stories, reflections, and thoughts are welcome. This goes doubly for perspectives within the movement such as the experience of seeking and obtaining allyship/solidarity from the international community as some living in or with family in Tibet, ground work in organizing the dustribution of funds, resources, or resistance, publicity and public awareness/consciousness, etc.

I'll start. I was (admittedly) young when this was happening, but already had been engaged and involved for a year or two in politics more broadly. I had been working with the UUA youth programming on a variety of community initiatives when a delegate of ministers traveled to meet with the Dalai Lama and several Tibetan activist communities both in their home mountains and abroad in exile. They've done this quite a few times over the years, before and since this particular delegation. One of the ministers who worked with us attended. He was gone for 18months sabbatical/spiritual and social development work on the trip, and when he came back, he led the district's interfaith activist groups through dozens of trainings and salon conversations to help us understand what he'd learned and what he wanted US to learn.

He came away with [and invited us to come away with] a few major foundations

1) any act of imperialism or colonization is a cause for profound and expansive grief. In fact the grief itself was part of the point because until we see the suffering of every person on earth as a violation of and offense to the humanity of EVERY person on earth, we will struggle to hold ourselves accountable for our own complicity.

2) complicity can be coerced, and that is always the accountability of the coercive authority structure, not the accountability of the individuals being coerced. This is not mutually exclusive with the need to repair the harm done to a community following coerced complicity as a form of reintegration into the healing process of a fractured social order.

3) we needed to operate with two paths of possibility - diasporic and indigenous. Ultimately, the preservation of a people, their culture, their humanity, their communities, is a complex one with very few guarantees. Every effort should be made to answer the intracommunal calls to action that are being made so as to ensure that on the micro/mezzo level (individuals, families, and small regional communities in particular) people are able to self-direct towards a diasporic-mobile preservation path or an indigenous-remaining preservation path as best suits their needs in the moment, and that a diasporic-return path is being established and maintained as effectively as possible (erosion of this path should be considered a warning sign of high risk actions being taken against the indigenous-remaining [coerced/autonomous] population). The goal, this minister explained, was always to preserve access to autonomy on both the individual and communal level, and that sometimes this would look like things we didn't understand or didn't want to understand as victory. As long as it came with the community in need at the helm, it was our job to wrestle with that possibility proactively rather than risk imposing our own needs-assessment on them. [Disclaimer: this came in the wake of concerns around the possible death of the Dalai Lama's reincarnation and heir being selected/identified by an imperial assembly rather than by the existing Tibetan process of identification, and specifically in the wake of the Dalai Lama's statements that all, even his own role, must one day end which had incited many difficult conversations around the world]

4) resistance was both an imperative and an active tense verb, meaning that any of us engaged in resistance needed to be in real conversation with others about it or we were NOT in fact resisting anything

5) slogans are catchy, but they can't be all you have. It is too easy to say the same words as others while acting against them, both intentionally and unintentionally.

I really was present in the tail end of this work's public prominence, and while I have done my best to stay aware since my initial exposure, I lack some of the necessary current reflections on the experience from various people and perspectives. Others who were engaged and involved, especially if it has remained in your primary focus of activism, what were your lessons so to speak and how have you grown or developed your approaches in response?

#free tibet #free palestine #organizer retrospective #democracy and dual power #optimism not blind faith

73 notes · View notes

dalishious · 1 year ago

Note

Sorry but I wanted to ask your opinion on this thought: Vivienne is unable to understand not everyone is as privileged as she is in regards to leaving the circle at first. She honestly thinks it’s that easy to find a patron and be allowed out.

It’s one of those things I notice a lot in certain communities I’m part of: those who are better off sometimes cannot understand why it’s hard for others. People whose parents have money don’t get why other people with the same disabilities as them are struggling to hold down jobs. Vivienne lucked out in her own way by getting into a somewhat decent circle and then having Bastion fall for her, so Templars wouldn’t risk pissing off a noble man.

What are your thoughts on this?

"Every person within each tower had an experience of Circle life unique to themselves. Some people suffered, and some were content. Some were cruel, some compassionate, and some indifferent." —Vivienne, when asked about Circle life

Now, one could certainly argue that the above quote is a cop-out. I certainly think it's part of the larger thread of Inquisition's push to make the Circles seem like they weren't that bad, despite every bit of previous lore showing and telling otherwise. But regardless, here Vivienne does acknowledge that she is aware to some degree that there was suffering.

"Nobody "winds up" at court, my dear. It takes a great deal of effort to arrive there. I caught the eye of Duke Bastien de Ghislain, an advantageous connection that opened many doors. When the position of enchanter to the Imperial Court became vacant, I was able to secure it." —Vivienne, when asked how she became court enchanter

Here, Vivienne says that she had to work hard to get her position, and I believe it. While luck played a role in terms of her love life with Duke Bastien, rising in power and connections and playing The Game from the disadvantage of being a mage is a challenge she had to overcome.

Vivienne has shown to be a uniquely talented and well spoken player of The Game. But 9/10 mages aren't going to have that skill, and they shouldn't have to just to have the small freedoms Vivienne won. And I say small freedoms, because let us remember that as Duke Bastien's lover, as court enchanter, her freedom is still entirely reliant on others. She must maintain good graces with those higher up on the Orlesian privilege scale in order to be treated as a fellow person. She is not allowed to slip up, even once, or she risks everything. It's no wonder Vivienne constantly holds herself with such structure and high standards.

#ask #vivienne #meta

83 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 17 days ago

Text

Today, June 4, marks the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre—a moment of both tragedy and hope. It was the bloody end to a nationwide democracy movement that brought together workers and students, the most promising push for political reform in the history of the People’s Republic of China. But despite the courage of many individual Chinese who fought for democracy and the solidarity of their international supporters, there has not been a comparable movement since—and it’s hard to imagine one arising anytime soon.

While the 2022 white paper protests—named after the blank sheets of white paper that demonstrators held up—against COVID-19 lockdowns demonstrated the Chinese public’s capacity for dissent and momentarily challenged the authoritarian state’s policies to a certain degree of success, they lacked the ideological depth, organizational structure, and systemic ambition of the 1989 pro-democracy movement. They were a reaction rather than a revolution, more about ending specific suffering than about redefining China’s political future. There has yet to be any revival of the spirit of 1989.

There is no single answer to why China lacks a grassroots democracy movement of the same scale today. Several interlocking factors—domestic, international, technological, and sociological—have suppressed the conditions necessary for such a movement to reemerge.

One of the most effective strategies of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has been its informal “bread-for-freedom” policy. Following the brutal crackdown of 1989, the CCP understood that outright repression alone could not maintain legitimacy. Economic growth was essential.

By delivering unprecedented levels of material prosperity—lifting millions of people out of poverty, building modern infrastructure, and creating urban middle classes—the CCP made a Faustian bargain with the Chinese people: economic opportunity in exchange for political obedience. Economic reform had begun prior to the 1989 Tiananmen movement and, in many ways, helped create the political, economic, and social conditions that gave rise to it. But at the time, a prevailing belief—shared by much of the public and even by key policymakers like Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang—was that political liberalization would closely follow, if not accompany, economic reform. Within this idealistic atmosphere, few recognized, let alone accepted, the notion of a bread-for-freedom bargain.

For the majority, however, the growth of the 1990s and the implicit new bargain worked. The cooptation of the Chinese elite—intellectuals, entrepreneurs, and technocrats—was key. With China’s rapid growth, they became stakeholders in the system rather than challengers to it. The intellectual elite, including most of the post-1989 entrepreneurs who emerged from these ranks, were originally idealists. This included college students, who saw it as their duty to push for societal progress—a conviction deeply rooted in traditional Chinese culture. Exposed to the realities of Western democracies and inspired by the ideals of democracy and human rights, young Chinese firmly believed that democracy should be China’s future.

As they turned their gaze toward the developed world, they also became acutely aware that, despite enjoying public respect, they were not fairly compensated under China’s distribution system. This sense of injustice left a lasting grievance deep in their hearts. But as they benefited from the new economic order, many of them shifted positions. The democracy movement, once led by students and intellectuals, found itself robbed of its natural base. Those who might have risked their lives in protest before were now more invested in protecting their gains.

Internationally, the CCP adopted a “market-for-everything” strategy: using China’s massive market as a bargaining chip to silence criticism and deter collective international action on human rights.

Foreign governments and corporations, enticed by China’s growth and population size, have often prioritized access over advocacy. The West allowed China’s accession to the World Trade Organization without any human rights conditions, for instance. Yahoo handed over the personal details of journalist and poet Shi Tao to the Chinese authorities in 2004, resulting in his arrest and sentencing. LinkedIn censored politically sensitive profiles and posts in China until the country exited the market in 2021, explicitly complying with local censorship laws. Apple removed apps (such as VPNs and Hong Kong protest tools) from its App Store in China upon government request.

While individual voices—activists, dissidents, and nongovernmental organizations—have been vocal, they operate in an environment that is increasingly isolated from power and policy. As a result, external pressure on the CCP has rarely been consistent or forceful enough to help reignite internal democratic momentum.

The CCP’s ability to generate sustained economic growth—even, until 2020, amid global downturns—has translated into a powerful narrative of legitimacy. In the minds of many Chinese, the CCP is not only the guardian of China’s stability but also the architect of its rise.

This legitimacy is reinforced by nationalist rhetoric and historical memory. China’s humiliation by foreign powers in the 19th and early 20th centuries is routinely invoked, and the CCP presents itself as the bulwark against chaos and Western subjugation. In this narrative, democracy is not a universal value but a foreign imposition that threatens national unity.

Perhaps the most profound transformation since 1989 has been the revolution in information technology. In China, this has enabled the construction of a comprehensive surveillance state—what many, such as myself and correspondent Kai Strittmatter, have called a digital dictatorship.

With full support from tech capital, the CCP has deployed artificial intelligence, facial recognition, data analytics, and big data integration to track, censor, and preempt dissent. China now monitors not only public spaces but also private lives, digital habits, and online speech. Authorities monitor mobile usage, including calls, messages, app data, and geolocation. Apps like WeChat and Alipay are integrated into daily life and are heavily surveilled. Users can be tracked, censored, or penalized for sharing politically sensitive content—even in private chats.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, although the costs eventually proved to be unsustainable, individuals in urban areas were closely tracked for compliance with shifting regulations. Digital anonymity is nearly impossible; every phone’s unique identifier is logged and monitored, and, in times of high tension, police check individual phones on the street for illicit content.

This infrastructure does more than punish—it shapes. The omnipresence of surveillance and censorship alters behavior and even thought.

The mere expectation of censorship alters public discourse and shapes internal beliefs about what is safe to think or say.

China Digital Times and China Media Project’s interviews show that many urban youth and intellectuals engage in coded language, sarcasm, or silence on social media—consciously tailoring speech to avoid being flagged. This produces a gradual shaping of internal red lines, where people begin to internalize the state’s logic of what is appropriate or dangerous.

Platforms like WeChat, Weibo, Douyin (the Chinese version of TikTok), Bilibili, and Zhihu deploy AI-powered algorithms designed to prioritize content that is state-friendly, nationalistic, consumer-orientated, and entertaining, not only to suppress dangerous ideas but also to promote nationalism, consumption, and apathy. Dissent becomes both dangerous and increasingly unthinkable.

There is, however, a more subtle yet equally powerful explanation for the absence of grassroots democratic mobilization—a transformation of the nature of community itself. Recent analyses, such as Derek Thompson’s “The Anti-Social Century” and Marc Dunkelman’s concept of the “missing middle ring” of human relations, provide us with some clues. Their arguments, though centered on American society, shed light on dynamics increasingly present in China and other countries.

The traditional grassroots democracy movement depended on a dense network of middle-ring relationships, such as neighbors, co-workers, and classmates—people familiar but not intimate. These were the bonds that created social cohesion and civil engagement. They made physical gatherings, shared grievances, and trust-based organizing possible.

The backbone of the Tiananmen movement was university students in Beijing, joined by workers, with protests then spreading to other cities. They were not a single tight-knit group but were linked through middle-ring relationships: classmates, student union colleagues, dormitory acquaintances, and peers across campuses. In those days, physical middle-ring gatherings were far more common and impactful, such as collective movie screenings, shared news viewing, and university-wide sports competitions. Mass discussions could only take place in person.

Compared to physical gatherings, online communication falls far shorter in generating the same levels of emotional contagion, shared enthusiasm, trust-based coordination, collective confidence (from safety in numbers), and horizontal solidarity. These are precisely the conditions that transform shared grievances into collective action. Middle-ring relationships create the threshold level of confidence needed for collective action: “If I see classmates or colleagues going, I’ll go,” or “If my neighbor’s son is marching, then it’s not too dangerous.”

Today, that middle ring is withering. Digital life favors the inner circle (close friends and family via private chats) and the outer circle (virtual groups united by ideology or hobby). But the middle ring—the town square, the public forum, the classroom, the community center—is increasingly absent. And in China, where digital life is not only fragmented but policed, this structural erosion becomes even more damaging.

The remote, phone-based, and screen-dominated culture has atomized individuals. People live within carefully curated digital bubbles, shaped not by proximity or shared civic life, but by algorithmic logic and ideological echo chambers. In such an environment, it becomes almost impossible to cultivate the tolerance, solidarity, and mutual accountability needed to fuel a movement for democratic change.

The failure of a new Tiananmen-style movement to emerge is not a failure of courage. Rather, it reflects a confluence of forces—authoritarian strategy, economic cooptation, global complicity, and deep technological restructuring of social life—that suppress the possibility of mass democratic mobilization.

But that does not mean hope is lost.

If democracy movements are to be reborn in China—or elsewhere—they must reckon with the new terrain. They must rediscover ways to rebuild the middle ring of civic life, forge solidarity in fragmented digital landscapes, and develop new strategies that don’t merely replicate past models but reimagine resistance in an age of AI, largely defined by surveillance and screens.

As we remember the sacrifices of those who stood in Tiananmen Square 36 years ago, we must also reflect on how to carry their vision forward.

11 notes · View notes