#instead of like endlessly voting which feels. wrong.

[blairdiggory]

Heyyyyyy, my parents are super passionate about an organization called the Alabaster Jar Project that helps victims of human trafficking integrate back into society. They're centered in San Diego, which is a hot spot for trafficking, so they all do as much as they can, but they're always looking for funding opportunities.

Harrah's Casino in SoCal is hosting a voting contest for several charities, and the winners get a BIG cash donation ($50,000!). The Alabaster Jar Project has been chosen to participate in it, and we REALLY need people to vote for it!

We'd super appreciate you voting for the Alabaster Jar Project in this fundraising campaign.

You don't need an account! You can vote right on the page, and the Alabaster Jar Project is the first option.

Link here

Thanks for helping us!! :)

[colorisbyshe]

Not to go back to this but I think what is so tired about the "Why am I expected to know ___? I wasn't taught this at school" or "My family was racist, how was I supposed to know that?" is that it's just so endlessly defensive that it seems to imply that being expected to unlearn bad behaviour, bad beliefs is an undue burden.

Like, even if you grow up in a town of five people who all look like you and act like you and believe what you believe, even if you had no access to the internet or to media that might broaden your horizons, and you have literally every excuse in the book to not know even the basics about other cultures or about what is or is not appropriate to verbalize or ask questions about--

The truth of the matter is... at a certain point... you gotta learn that information anyways if you want to participate in the world. So, if you haven't learned it yet, saying "WHY WAS I EXPECTED TO KNOW THIS? DON'T SHAME ME" is never going to work. You did or said something hurtful. The only proper response is, "I'm sorry." You can maybe tack on "I genuinely didn't know" (Which might sometimes be true! But, if we're being honest, often, it isn't) and then "I'll do better next time."

When you say or do something prejudiced or unempathetic, you are not the victim when you're called out for it. The person you hurt is. And, sometimes, that person won't even forgive you and that's okay. You change anyways so the next person doesn't get hurt and doesn't have to decide if they forgive you or not. You learn.

Also, at a certain point, lack of education from school or family or anyone else stops even being a part of the equation for your excuses. Because what's actually happening is a lack of curiosity. As you hit your teen years, your young adult years, and just full adulthood, ignorance of the law doesn't exempt you from the consequences for breaking the law. Why are you 17 and you've never pondered the humanity of the people around you or maybe the people far away from you?

"I was raised by bigots!" "Propaganda this" "American education system that."

Okay, no one raised you make a tumblr account but you sure did figure that out. No one taught you about fandom or AO3, yet you got there. Your bio has "If you voted for Trump, DNI!" despite America being full of pro-Trump propaganda.

Why is it that the only propaganda you can't shake off is the racist shit or the xenophobic shit or the transmisogynistic shit?

You are a person with autonomy and the capacity to question shit. It is normal to feel shame when you realize maybe you were a bit slow on the uptake of common knowledge (and common fucking decency). If you experience that shame and instead lash out, that's your fault. You chose to do that. That's reactionary behaviour.

You aren't entitled to be coddled through your personal growth. Sometimes, it's going to be embarrassing that you're not always a great person. Embarrassment can be a positive emotion. It should make you want to do better so you're embarrassed less. And, if you're actually the good person you claim to be, not wanting to hurt other people should be motivation enough.

I'm gonna be real with you--if you are in a place of privilege but even if you aren't, life is going to be FULL of unlearning shit and relearning shit the right way or finding out shit has changed and some things are no longer acceptable or maybe NEVER were acceptable, and you NEED to learn that take that entire process on the chin. You fucked up, okay, be better next time.

It's scary to find out you were hurting people or were wrong or stupid or embarrassing yourself. What's scarier is not growing from that knowledge.

[thedailydroll]

France’s Political Fiasco: Where Baguettes, Budget Cuts, and Macron's Crisis Collide

Read this first - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0q0zvvjj19o. My take,

Ah, France, the ever-charming, endlessly unpredictable nation that thrives on political theatre. In case you missed it, the French government is on the verge of collapsing, which, if we’re being honest, feels like a déjà vu of a particularly spicy telenovela—except, instead of passionate love affairs and broken hearts, it’s all about social security budgets and no-confidence votes.

Apparently, the French Parliament has decided that Prime Minister Michel Barnier’s decision to use special powers to push through a social security budget—because, why not—has crossed the line into treasonous territory, and the only proper response is, naturally, a vote of no confidence. Because, you know, the smooth running of government affairs is so overrated.

But of course, France isn’t the only European hotspot to erupt into a politically charged volcano. Germany, the powerhouse of the EU, is stumbling into its own little electoral soap opera, where political infighting is practically a national sport. A snap general election is coming, and everyone seems to be eagerly awaiting which coalition will implode next. Truly, the EU is like a rock band in its twilight years—still putting on shows, but most members can’t stand each other anymore, and the bass player is always off-key.

Then, there’s the big question: can France and Germany—two countries that, for decades, have been the “engines” of the EU—keep the whole thing from falling apart? Apparently not, if the state of French politics is any indication. France’s political stability is currently so wobbly, you’d think someone had replaced its national symbol of the rooster with a rather exhausted and mildly confused duck.

But what’s that? France, according to this article, is Europe's second-largest economy? Surely, this means everything will be fine. It’s not as if the country’s growing budget deficit and ballooning government debt are a bit... concerning. No, let’s just focus on how great France’s economy is, even as French taxpayers are beginning to wonder whether they'll be asked to foot the bill for another reform (which is never as fun as it sounds). After all, what could go wrong when the second-largest economy in the eurozone is teetering on the edge of chaos? Absolutely nothing. The Eurozone’s reputation is in safe hands.

Now, let’s talk about the true champion of the hour, Emmanuel Macron. There he is, in Saudi Arabia, speaking calmly about how strong France’s economy is, as if the world’s gaze isn’t fixed on the impending political trainwreck back home. Why worry about the fact that his country might soon be leaderless when you can swan about with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman? What better way to bolster national morale than by reminding everyone that, even though the French Parliament is literally about to combust, we’re all fine—look, shiny oil deals!

And then, we get to Macron’s brilliant political move: calling a snap election in the summer. Oh, what could possibly go wrong? Well, as it turns out, quite a lot. His party, Renaissance, took quite the beating in the election, and now the French government is divided between three parties that dislike each other almost as much as the average person dislikes unsolicited political opinions at family gatherings. Not exactly the recipe for decisive governance, is it?

Meanwhile, Marine Le Pen, the never-ending presidential hopeful and political nemesis of Macron, is waiting in the wings, hoping for the sweet, sweet scent of Macron’s resignation. Naturally, she’s under investigation for alleged embezzlement, but let’s not let minor legal inconveniences get in the way of a good political drama. If Macron steps down, it’s game on for her, and she could run in a snap election. Who wouldn’t want to add a bit of chaos to their day with a potential far-right president in France? It would be like swapping out a broken down sports car for a less reliable, but far more explosive, one.

So, as France flounders through political gridlock, Europe watches nervously. The EU, once seen as a bastion of strength and unity, now looks like a toddler trying to assemble a Lego castle but only managing to create a sad pile of blocks. With a mix of rising autocrats and increasingly fragmented political landscapes, France’s crisis is far from an isolated incident. But let’s not panic. After all, as Macron so graciously put it, “France is a rich, solid country.” Sure, it’s like a solid rock that’s currently being eroded by waves of political infighting, but hey, details.

In conclusion, France’s political future seems as certain as a baguette in a Parisian bakery. There’s a lot riding on what happens next, and who’s in charge is anyone’s guess. But rest assured, whatever transpires, it will be just as delightfully chaotic as a good French farce. Let’s just hope the audience doesn’t start booing.

[shouldntcryoverit]

Fireworks

Dad!Rex x Jedi!Reader

w/ Padme, Anakin, Ahsoka, Obi wan and the Skywalker twins ;)) they’re all very much alive and happy.

After the war, with no order 66 because I said so. This is my first time ever writing children, a weird milestone i know, but I hope I did okay let me know! I was gonna give the 501st boys a mention or a scene, but it didn’t feel natural and I couldn’t squeeze it in - so if you want them there, they’re there <3

Also I decided on the name Mira as ‘mirjahaal’ translate to ‘peace of mind’ in Mando’a, and I just know that Rex would name his kid after something like that. (also i felt smart with the whole deeper meaner situation)

taglist -> @pinkiemme

———————————————————————

“Da!”

Rex swivelled his head to the table he had been called from. He still reacted to ‘Captain’ as a variation of his name, but for around three years now ‘Da’ had caught his attention far quicker.

“Yeah C’yare?”

Perched on the edge of the table was his four year old daughter, Mira, smiling smugly as she puffed out her chest and straightened her back just how she’d learnt from Cody. She beamed as her father walked over and pressed a small kiss to the top of her head.

In a short check formed out of habit, he recognised her now braided hair, which had been partitioned into two dainty lines down her blonde head. He had gotten better at doing hair for her sake, but not that good; Leia must’ve gotten ahold of her. Whereas Luke was becoming so much like his father, Leia already had the willpower and strength that mimicked her mother, though that was no bad thing.

Her dress, again courtesy of Padmé, was a beautiful blueish pink colour, and it matched in harmony with the rosemary hue of the sky that bled through the wide windows behind them. It was almost night, and somehow there was an undeniable peace in the air. Perhaps it was something about the time of day, or perhaps it was purely because nowadays there were hardly any reasons for it not to be peaceful.

“Tell Unca Ani I’m right!” Mira spoke with surprising indignation for someone so small. That had always made people laugh.

“I’m not wrong!” Anakin proclaimed, appearing to be hurt by the child’s comment, but failing to hide his grin.

He was rested against the kitchen counter, still slumped like he always did. He perked up slightly as the ‘argument’ began again.

Jaida was near enough to have heard most of their conversation from where she sat beside a dozing Ahsoka. She was mostly focused on the datapad in her hands: lists of still uncompensated troopers that still needed to be helped, but she was far more inclined to listen to the sounds behind her. She smiled distantly at how Anakin acted around her daughter. He softened, even as Mira babbled away.

As Rex and Mira sat and stood respectively, Anakin found it almost laughable how much they were alike. She looked so much like her mother, but her blonde hair and honey eyes were the exact copy of his, that was undeniable.

“Unca Ani say that on Flucca plants glow in tha dark!” Rex smiled sweetly at his daughter’s awe “But that’s imbossible!”

“It’s not!”

“Nope!” Mira popped the ‘p’ like Jaida always did. Anakin laughed at that. It was a solid argument.

“Well, then we’ll go to Felucia. You can see it all for yourself.”

It was a promise Rex was happy to make, especially as Mira lit up at his words.

“Gotta be careful though, sometimes they bite!” Jaida teased from behind the sofa back.

As Mira giggled, a knock sounded from the door to the apartment. Ahsoka stirred up in her light sleep, though Jaida hushed her and moved instead. She pushed off the couch beneath her, winking at the grinning toddler before she made it to the door.

As it opened, Padmé and the twins were revealed, both looking perky behind their tired faces. Luke looked half asleep in truth, but Leia was tugging the senator along with a fist she’d latched onto a few fingers. It had been a long day; no words were needed for Jaida to understand that.

“Hey! You all look so tired what happened?” Jaida laughed lightly as she welcomed them into the room.

“Yoda went bonkers.” There was a hint of remorse in Luke’s voice.

The Jedi chuckled, “What’s new?”

Padmé watched with kind eyes as her children weaved off, and laughed as Ahsoka only just managed to reposition her posture before she was attacked by them both. Luke and Leia were only a year and a bit older than Mira, but they matched each other in energy.

It took them no time at all to close the door and cross into the kitchen where Anakin, Rex and Mira were. Mira had resorted to asking about the different planets, to which Anakin found himself wishing to remember the answers. Rex couldn’t help himself from laughing at the exchange.

“Is the Senate in disagreement again?” Jaida asked as she grabbed a mug for Padmé’s tea, and judging by how she rubbed her temples she suspected she was right.

“Not entirely; it’s just this new vote. Some of the Senators are too focused on the expenses of it all, and I can’t blame them. It won’t be cheap, but it needs to be done.”

“This that liberation bill Cody was talking about?” Rex interjected.

“Yes, it should be simple enough. Only they’re just some people who I can’t seem to budge on it.” Padmé sighed, but didn’t hold that annoyance for much longer. “But anyway I didnt come here to discuss even more politics, how long until they start?”

The reason for their gathering. It wasn’t often that coruscant had fireworks, but when they did it was always something spectacular. The cause for this celebration was particularly important; the 5th anniversary of the end of the clone wars. The senate had decided without much debate to introduce the idea of fireworks, Anakin even joked that it was the quickest they’d ever decided something, yet it was still exciting nonetheless.

Ahsoka got up from where she had been talking to Luke and Leia and grabbed a fruit from the bowl. She laughed along with what conversation had been happened, and grinned at each joke and jibe.

“It’s a shame Obi-wan couldn’t make it back in time.” The togruta spoke after his mention.

“It won’t be the last time we have something like this, and plus, I think Mandalore have something planned as well!”

Ahsoka shrugged in agreement at Padmé, taking a bite at the same time.

��Oh, look!” She spoke between mouthfuls. They all followed the line of her outstretched hand, looking towards the window now beginning to light up in disarray.

“It’s starting!” Luke interjected. He pushed through to the front with Leia hot on his tail. And indeed it was, the beginnings of bright crackles started to compete with the stars behind them. The fireworks were just above the senate building, bemusing the gathering with small, golden splashes of light in intricate patterns. It wasn’t loud, the apartment being so far away, but the distant sound of bangs made Mira jump a few times.

Rex comforted her, taking her up in his arms. She relaxed as soon as she knew she was safe with him; he kept her safe. That was the promise he’d make a thousands times over and more if he could. Jaida met his eyes, and hugged his arm with her head rested on his shoulder. Everything was right; real. The war was over and they had won. The fireworks were a beautiful touch, but nothing could displace the satisfaction of watching your own life grow into something you never even imagined it could. Rex had endured enough, and now he could honestly say it was worth it. He kissed Jaida’s forehead as she melted into his side.

The smaller, yellowish bursts began to grow: feeding into the sky as pinks, oranges, blues and greens spiralled off from their sources. Each pop of colour that continued into circles or stars had it’s own mind, yet still unfolded as if it were puppetry. Some shot straight up and exploded after a minute of delightful teasing, and wove between themselves like missiles. They were the ones that made Luke squeal in excitement the most.

Others whirled in spirals, endlessly collecting momentum and continuing in their talented hast; or shattered into millions of personalised sparks you couldn’t choose which one to follow. They tumbled down in rains of coloured stars, settling as if the art they’d shared with an entire silent city was only fiction. Their message was received in awe, and Jaida held a teary gaze even as they faded. Luke and Leia clapped, Mira laughed, but the adults shared pregnant silence, a moment for what they had found for themselves. Children, family, peace. Love.

The war weighed heavily, it always would. But it was over, they had lived, and a new life had begun.

[sixteenthshen]

i need help

I read a post on Zhihu last night - “How to evaluate the finale of Word of Honor?” The top commenter’s writing just killed me.

Heavy spoilers for episode 33/34. There’re no spoilers for the episodes after that, but I can’t guarantee this if there are replies.

The rest hidden behind a cut. 

I don’t need help explaining the finale or the happy ending, bad ending whatever it is, I’ve found my own way to come to terms with it. But I can’t accept what happened in 33/34 and the lack of follow up on the core of the issue, and that’s blocking me from enjoying the “HE”. To be fair, I think I may be a bit hormonal? Because this is really making me feel like crap. 

-----

This is a comment made by a Chinese user on Zhihu: 

I only want to say; the show might as well have ended when A-Xu jumped down the cliff after WKX. Even though it's a bit lame, at least the soulmate feelings were still there.

The grand finale basically destroyed the soulmate bond built up over 20+ episodes. The essence of it is gone; all of the "candy" and "knives" feel like they've been stripped away.

I've written so much about WKX & ZZS and how they were both falling for each other, saving each other. And now it all looks like a big joke.

It turns out ZZS's soulmate is ZZH, not WKX. The mountains and rivers in the world can't compare to meeting my soulmate. Since my soulmate is gone, I might as well die. (Play on the quote from the drama, instead of why should I live, it becomes I should just die)

(The poster starts talking to ZZS directly - referring to him as you) You're really a mistreated (tortured?) concubine, aren't you? Once you decide to give your whole heart, whole person away, you somehow always end up meeting some fake evil bastard (reference to Farewell my Concubine, basically that ZZS always ends up being suckered)

When you first fell into Prince Jin's trap, it's because you were young and not yet wise to the ways of the world, and believed in the grand words of your cousin and got conned into the world of politics. Sinking into the dirtiest, muddiest of marshes.

You plotted tirelessly for 18 months, suffered through 18 months of pain from the 7 nails, and finally exchanged it for 3 years of freedom. But when you met WKX, you fell right back in again.

Heraclitus said, "You cannot step into the same river twice" <<(I think this person mixed up the meaning of this quote, cause it doesn't fit, but basically intends to say people shouldn't make the same mistake twice)

The first time you stepped into the river, you got away with only half your life. The next time you stepped into the river, you nearly lost your life 4x (under YBY's sword, when you jumped off the cliff to your death for love, pulling out your nails, exploding the mountain to cause an avalanche + suicide), in the end you became a living dead person on Changming mountain.

I don't know if I should call you a living dead man, anyway, in my heart, once you pulled out the nails from your body, cutting off any other alternative you had just to help WKX take revenge… while WKX came back from the dead, and worked with everyone present at the scene to give the performance of a lifetime, you were already dead.

What a mockery, a farce.

You gave up everything but in the end, you were nothing more than a spectator.

He wanted you to give him face, to let him go home to explain things. You quietly stepped aside and gave him the stage. He wanted your baiyi sword to demonstrate his family's sword technique, to prove his identity. You gave it to him without a second word. He cut Zhao Jing's arms and legs tendons, crippled his martial arts, finally took revenge. You were happy for him despite everything.

When Mo Huaiyang accused him of being the Ghost Valley Master, he openly admitted to it and said the entire first part was just an act. You stood in front of him, to protect him. Said he is your shidi, and stood with him without any reservations.

But he had secretly already reached an agreement with Ye Baiyi. He knew YBY wouldn't hurt him, but you didn't know and yet you still shielded him. So terribly afraid that YBY would hurt him because of his identity. 

Everyone knew this was part of the scheme he laid out, everyone participated in his scheme. Only you didn't know. Only you foolishly believed that he wouldn't be alright without you, that he needed you to help him take revenge. That he had his difficulties so he couldn't confess the truth to you, as long as he did, then you would be the first to know everything. That he was your soulmate. This word "soulmate", if said enough times, it would even be real. In this life, right up until the end, we can't even fully understand ourselves, how do we talk about others?

----- 

the source is the top voted answer here. I like this poster a lot, she shared some great things throughout the course of the drama, 3 of which were the base of poems-related posts I’ve made here. I was doing fine before, but in the course of translating this answer for a friend, I made myself feel worse.

She later forced herself to look at it from WKX’s perspective and wrote a piece on it as well, but it... was very forced and I’m not too sure she even believed it herself. She ended that part with - “this made her feel very keenly that no matter how similar two souls may be, in the end, they are still two souls. He isn’t you and he will never be you. You can work endlessly and tirelessly to be closer, but your souls can never meet.”

I... I’m too sad to translate the WKX part in order to be fair to WKX in this post (if I feel better about it, i will later? but it didn’t make me feel better at all tbh) 

Can someone who can articulate well and believe that what WKX did was right, please help to make me understand episodes 32-34 from his perspective?

My main issues are:

We never got a proper 1-to-1 discussion between WKX and ZZS over the issue. At first, they were celebrating as a group, I can accept it. There wasn’t a time or place.

But when ZZS went back to his room early and sober, when everyone else was still drinking and having fun, I felt so bad for him.

When WKX came into his room, looking for ZZS when drunk, I know it isn’t supposed to be like this - but I can’t help but feel he didn’t dare to talk to A-Xu 1-to-1. Instead he went when he was drunk to spill his heart. It can be thought of as sweet, because the first person he thinks of when he’s drunk is A-Xu... but I can’t help but find it very selfish, because it leaves A-Xu with no way to talk about things. If you’ve ever talked to a drunk while sober, you would understand what I mean, it’s a one-way conversation, you can’t get anything through.

But that conversation left A-Xu with enough guilt that he can’t come clean to WKX about what he did. How can he tell WKX that he pulled out his nails, and is about to die. To take away WKX’s happiness, when Lao Wen just told him about how happy he was to have him in his life?

Lao Wen had 0 intention to be cruel, but it ended up being more cruel. And this lack of a proper discussion between the two of them, makes me call into question the whole thing about soulmates. I believe Lao Wen loves A-Xu the best he can (with his somewhat emotionally stunted self), but he’s not putting himself in the other person’s shoes to care for them. 

Love =/= care. And by not caring enough in this matter, I feel it’s thrown him into OOC. Where is the WKX who cared so much for ZZS at the start? Where is the tenderness? 

The drama never properly addressed why WKX faked his death and not tell A-Xu. The only reason they gave was that A-Xu was heavily injured (through Wu Xi). WKX just admitted he was wrong (and should drink). That’s all.

Thankssss. 

Please don’t preach to me about the happy ending or talk about the finale. I personally can’t resolve 32-34, I have found a way to accept the ending as long as I can accept these 3 episodes.

I may not be able to immediately accept your POV but I will force myself to try to find something that fits. I want to keep shipping wenzhou :( 

[popculturebuffet]

Amphibia Reviews: Toad to Redemption and Maddie and Marcy

Hello all you happy people! And welcome back to my weekly coverage of Amphibia! And today we have a suprisingly important Toadstool episode.. and a MADDIE AND MARCY EPISODE. Guess which one i’m actually excited about. But regradless it’s a good batch this week so join me under the cut for my thoughts with spoilers

Toad to Redemption: A not half bad episode, this one concerns everyone’s faviorite Monopoly Man Fried Chicken Baby, as it turns out he’s finally grown a heart. It turns out the Toad Tower incident.. actually changed him as a person. I’m as shocked as you. I mean he’s still a greedy corrupt hick, you can’t paint a gopher orange and call it a basketball... 

Look i’ts a long story i’m legally barred from talking about. Point is Toadstool is a greedy asshole but one who cares about his consituents now and actually enjoys the town and taking care of it. In return the citzens actually like him now: they may of rightfully tried to vote him out but his genuine attempts at doing good, in this episodes case spending money on potholes instead of a Jacuzzi for him and Toadie and helping fix a falling sign, have made him actually beloved. 

Naturally though, it’s not that easy and a newt comes down to give him the job running Toad Tower, and him refusing it would mean time in prison. Because as if we needed the reminder, The Newt ruling class sucks and so far the only person we’ve seen related to the castle who isn’t either hiding an edltrich demon,  a snob, or some form of hired goon is Marcy, whose blind to all of that. I do wish Marcy was in this episode for that reason, as i’m waiting for her to finally see the downside of the king and the people she’s been working for, but I get why not: it’d make the episode too easy, and distract from the character it’s actually about and to the episodes credit they wrote her out well enough: She’s studying Frobo all day. 

So the Mayor begs Anne, who showed up with a bunch of parking tickets from Hop Pop (And ones from when they were out of town no less), for help. She only ends up agreeing becaue his puppy dog eyes are so ungodly unsettling she just wants it to stop but I presume getting those parking tickets cleared up is part of it. 

So it goes as you’d expect: THe Plantars try to make him look bad, it dosen’t work. Though to Toadstool’s credit despite the hefty punishment he does prepare to tell the newt lady off after she explains Toadie won’t be going with them. You can do a LOT to Toadstool but no one is a condescning bitch to his husband-minon and gets away with it! 

But then the three toads from last season show up, the ones Anne fought, lead by Bog that pointy guy. Look i’ts been almost two years. and felt like 90. The Toads have become Bandit’s since leaving Grime behind, which.. you.. you could’ve done that and had a consistent base of operations and a home in the frog alps. So naturally a fight breaks out but Toadstool bluffs htem to throw them off guard and the town easily fights them off. 

Thankfully Toadstool gets out of things. Jacinda, said newt lady, finds him too soft for the job and puts Bog in charge.... so.. yay? No.. not really no yay here none. So while our heroes goad themselves for yet another enemy on the docket, the town confirm how much they care about Toadstool, Toadstool caresses toady and I die a little on the inside. 

Toad to Redemption is decent. It’s not the best of this half of the season but it does speak to how this half has been far better, with the return to wartwood giving us far more character stuff that had been lacking, and notably focusing more on the side cast. Speaking of whiccchhhhh

Maddie and Marcy Look unless this episode screwed up horribly somehow, this episode already had my good will just by teaming up two of my faviorites: As i’ve made clear Marcy is endlessly relatable to me as an awkward nerd myself and Haley brings her a-game every time. As for Maddie she was an instant faviorite from her first apperance being married off to Sprig, with her spotlight episode “Cursed!” being one of my faviorites of the series thus far, and a generally great one that fleshed her out from a creepy but endearing backgroudn character with sinsiter intent. to a nice if spooky little girl who uses the darkest magics for the greatest goods. 

So the two were a natural to not only get a spotlight together, but also in something the show lampshades one that’s mostly devoid of the main cast. Anne, Sprig and Hop Pop all only show up for quick gags, and the story is entirley around the titular Duo. And safe to say my hype was warranted: This is one of the standouts of the season by a long shot and one of the funniest episodes this season, while giving Maddie even more depth and allowing Marcie to play a supporting roll this go round. 

Maddie is working on her biggest spell yet: to raise the dead. Frankenstein styles. But her sisters keep begging her for attention and eventually get bored and spill her carefully prepared cauldron causing her to snap at them. It is however a nice layered conflict: This is very important to Maddie and rightfully so as this is her first level 2 spell, and she was specifically asked to do it by one of the neighbors. And it’s not like this is something she can half ass... if done right you get frakenweenie if done wrong you get pet semetary. It’s a very fine line. This is her passion, her calling as she puts it later when she explains her backstory. The issue is she treats her sisters like babies and ignores them due to this passion.. it’s fine to have passions but you have to make time for those who matter. I’ts fine she dosen’t spend as much time with her sibs as she used to, juggling them and flashback Maddie is fucking precious... but she has to make some for them. They love her. They have to understand how important this is to her and she has to understand how important she is to them. 

So Maddie skulks off to get get some suplies, and Marcy is impressed as she’s been looking for a magic user and tries introducing herself.. and gets set on fire. But the two quickly bond: Marcie’s been looking for a teacher in magic being a fan of something resembling harry potter... I really feel for this show as i’ts clear the creators were fans from this episode’s tiny shout out to it and the first temple’s bigger one, and they clearly had no idea any of this would happen. None of us did. So we get a bonding montage which is the best scene of the episode and the funniest scene of the season, and very possibly the series, thus far. The two find slime, ticks, a corpse (Or rather hop pop whose annoyed they thought he was a corpse), digging up some graveyard soil next to some confused mourners and best of all “assorted limbs” which while I have the image up front I can’t resist sharing again..

This.. is easily the best thing the series has ever produced. Their just so fucking precious. They also high five each other as new best friends. The triplets though aren’t happy about any of this, not getting that shared intrests are a thing and what not and instead plot to get big. Look there are easier ways to do that: asking zoltar.. or a groovy ant who wants you to do a rap number. 

They instead use one of Maddie’s spells without asking and also vandalize her book because their babies.. she snaps at them again and they plan to grow big. Meanwhile Marcie and her beloved apprentence work on tampering in frog’s domain and successfuly do a necromancy.. only for the now giant sized triplet #1 to bound in.. followed by #’s 2 and 3. Our two heroines run for their lives from the giant babies, and Maddie is panicked as she now realizes what they did.. and that without proper ballance, the spell will cause them to explode. 

So while the triplets grasp with the expansion and inetivible kaboom, Maddie has Marcie prepare an antidote for four.. and goes alll giant man to calm them, juggling them adorably one last time. Peace is restored and Maddie agrees to get a better work life ballance. 

Maddie and Marcy as I said is one of the standout sof the season and easily my faviorite so far, being funny while having great character work, which is when the show’s at it’s best. or dramatic and great character work. either way this one was a treat.

Next Week: Our heroes seek out a second temple, while our anti-heroes seek out a legendary hammer.

[bobbystompy]

91 Quotes I Enjoyed From 2020

Below are my favorite quotes from 2020. Though most occurred throughout the year, some took place before but were encountered during.

1) “You don’t have to be new to make new.” - Rick Rubin

2) “He put the beat on and go to sleep then wake up with a verse.” - The Lox

3) “Every opinion is bad.” - Blink-155

4)

(via Twitter)

5) “At the start of every disaster movie, there’s a scientist being ignored.”

6) “Be brave enough to suck at something new.”

7) “Comedy is the only job you can have where you can use everything you know” - Robin Williams via Dave Chappelle

8) “What’s the worst swear word where you live?” - Josiah Hughes

9) “Cookies are a really great way to get everybody to like you for a short period of time” - YSAC

10) “The worst dancer at a wedding is the one who’s not dancing.” - John Mulaney

11) “I never saw the end of the tunnel. I only saw myself running out of one." - Kobe Bryant

12) "A good movie begins as you're walking out of the theater" - Ethan Hawke

13) “When I was young and starting in cinema, there was a saying that I carved deep into my heart which is, 'The most personal is the most creative.’ That quote was from our great Martin Scorsese.” - Bong Joon-ho

14) “Run to the rescue with love, and peace will follow” - River Phoenix via Joaquin Phoenix

15) “Thank you -- I will drink until next morning.” - Bong Joon-ho

16) “Men will bury their emotions for decades and then take it all out on children tubing while they drive the boat.” - @krauter_

17) “They help you with the dumb face stuff, but they don’t tell you how to fix it” - Adam (Nate’s friend), on having older sisters

18) “We all had our connections, but it’s not the details themselves that matter, it’s the feeling behind them. There are a million coming-of-age tales. Lady Bird’s secret sauce is how deeply its creator gave a shit. The older I get, the less I care about anything but the sense of a filmmaker’s personal connection to the material. It doesn’t matter what it’s about, what genre it is, or whether it’s genre at all. I only really care that it feels like something the filmmaker had to tell me, and that it was that filmmaker in particular who had to tell it. It has to answer the ‘why are you telling me this’ question, and not just why are you telling me, but why are you telling me.

Lady Bird is a movie that feels like only Greta Gerwig could’ve made. And it’s only because it’s so specific to her that it can be so meaningful to so many people.” - Vince Mancini

19) "I have cast some lonely votes, fought some lonely fights, mounted some lonely campaigns. But I do not feel lonely now.” - Bernie Sanders

20) “Ever hear a Beatles song you haven’t heard before?”

21) “Drinking is an emotional thing. It joggles you out of the standardism of everyday life, out of everything being the same. It yanks you out of your body and your mind and throws you against the wall. I have the feeling that drinking is a form of suicide where you're allowed to return to life and begin all over the next day. It's like killing yourself, and then you're reborn. I guess I've lived about ten or fifteen thousand lives now.” - Charles Bukowski

22) “You shouldn’t have to hear a band to know if they’re good or not” - Josiah Hughes

23) “I was raised by OGs.  Some of you were raised by IG.  I understand.” - Ice-T

* * *

[Here is where I note the line of demarcation that was the COVID-19 pandemic hitting the US, pushed forward by Tom Hanks’ announcement, the NBA and NCAA shutting down, and, then, the nation itself.]

* * *

24) “There are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades happen.” - Vladimir Lenin

25) "Taken together, this is a massive failure in leadership that stems from a massive defect in character. Trump is such a habitual liar that he is incapable of being honest, even when being honest would serve his interests. He is so impulsive, shortsighted, and undisciplined that he is unable to plan or even think beyond the moment. He is such a divisive and polarizing figure that he long ago lost the ability to unite the nation under any circumstances and for any cause. And he is so narcissistic and unreflective that he is completely incapable of learning from his mistakes. The president’s disordered personality makes him as ill-equipped to deal with a crisis as any president has ever been. With few exceptions, what Trump has said is not just useless; it is downright injurious." - Peter Wehner

26) "Epidemics have a way of revealing underlying truths about the societies they impact." - Anne Applebaum

27) “A funny thing about quarantining is hearing your partner in full work mode for the first time. Like, I’m married to a ‘let’s circle back’ guy — who knew?” - Laura Norkin

28) 

(Jojo Rabbit)

29) “The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. - Deadwood: The Movie

30) “All bleeding stops eventually.” - Deadwood: The Movie

31) “Our Father, which art in heaven… / Let him fucking stay there” - Deadwood: The Movie

32) “It’s like a power outage, but we still have power” - Ryen Russillo, on the pandemic

33) “Whenever Sox baseball returns, it’ll be weird to not have Farmer on the call any more. The relationship between a fan and longtime announcer is always built in the little moments. One afternoon, he’s the soundtrack as you clean the garage. On another night, he’s your bookmark for the game as you stand in line for churros or walk down the ramps at Sox Park to try for better seats in the 100 level. A voice like Farmer’s becomes so familiar that you only really notice when it’s no longer there.” - Kevin Kaduk, on the passing of Ed Farmer

34) 

(via Twitter)

35) “In my songs, I try to look through someone else’s eyes, and I want to give the audience a feeling more than a message” - John Prine

36) “Observe everything. Admire nothing.” - Generation Kill

37) “Trump, by that definition, has always been a wartime president -- always willing to sacrifice people he doesn’t know to things he only sort of cares about” - David Roth

38) "Whenever they speak Michael Jordan, they should speak Scottie Pippen." - Michael Jordan

39) "Fiction is a bridge to the truth that journalism can't reach." - Hunter S. Thompson

40) “Airlines sending me “we’re in this together” emails. When my suitcase was 52 pounds I was on my own.” - Mike Dentale

41) “Sometimes you can be the worst source of your own story” - Ryen Russillo

42) “Family is not necessarily blood, but instead who you would bleed for.”

43)

(via Twitter)

44) "This is the deal that Jordan made, knowingly or unknowingly — that he would trade everything he had for everything he wanted. And then, when he won all those things, he found that he had nothing but that.” - David Roth

45) “I’m brand loyal, but the brand doesn’t matter” - Caitie Miller, on why she doesn’t like generic peanut butter

46) “NOBODY shitposts Gene Hackman!!” - Mark Dehlinger

47) “When a man concludes that any stick is good enough to beat his foe with—that is when he picks up a boomerang.” - G.K. Chesterton

48) “You can be appalled forever, but shocked only once.” - Jeff Weiss, on early Eminem

49) “Whether I’m pessimistic or optimistic, the fight’s the same” - David Simon

50) “Freedom can never be completely won, but it can be lost.” - Bernard Simon

51) “Racism in America is like dust in the air. It seems invisible — even if you’re choking on it — until you let the sun in. Then you see it’s everywhere. As long as we keep shining that light, we have a chance of cleaning it wherever it lands.” -Kareem Abdul Jabbar

52) “In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist -- we must be anti-racist.” - Angela Davis

53) “Start as close to the end as possible” - Kurt Vonnegut, on creative writing

54) “You can’t stay woke all the time — that’s insomnia.” - Dr. Cornel West

55) “No, I get it. I’ve dated a lot of Geminis.”

56) “The joy of life comes from our encounters with new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.” - John Krakauer, Into The Wild (via Tyler Keller)

57) "I couldn't show them my For You because it's pretty much just lesbian stuff and depression memes" - Maggie Loesch, on showing TikTok to her coworkers

58) "It's 1 a.m. in Slovakia and I've already had one bottle of wine and I don't know how long this press conference will go, so good luck to me." - Marian Hossa, following his NHL Hall of Fame announcement

59) “All I want in life is to go on an Anguilla group trip” - Mandy Gilkes

60) “You miss old friends when you don’t see them, but you miss them more when you do.” - Chuck Klosterman

61) “The only way to appreciate the present is to pretend it’s already the past.” - Chuck Klosterman

62) Enjoy the power and beauty of your youth, oh, never mind You will not understand the power and beauty of your youth Until they've faded, but trust me, in 20 years, you'll look back At photos of yourself and recall in a way you can't grasp now How much possibility lay before you and how fabulous you really looked

(”Everybody's Free [To Wear Sunscreen]”)

Second time that essay’s been quoted on this list.

64) "I mean, it's just human nature to suck up to the people above you, crap on those beneath you, and undercut your equals” - Brian, Family Guy

65) “You never quit a job. You quit a manager.” - Brian Bedford

66) “All the pictures in my house are of people I’m not friends with” - Tracy Cunningham

67) “In order to leave something behind, you have to leave.” - Dr. Herman, Grey’s Anatomy

68) 

(via Twitter)

69) “You can obsess about death if you don’t have to obsess about dying.” - Brendan Kelly via “White Noise”

70) “If it’s right to do, it’s wrong to wait.” - Andy, doorman 

71)

72) “When I'm sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court] and I say, 'When there are nine,' people are shocked. But there'd been nine men, and nobody's ever raised a question about that.” - Ruth Bader Ginsburg

73) "America is mostly people who’ve never left their state saying we have the best country in the world." - Billy Wayne Davis

74) “A writer is someone who knows at least 80% of their writing sucks.” - Gabe Hudson

75) 

(via Twitter)

76) “You’re dead twice” - Brendan Kelly

77) “Perfect is the enemy of good” - Voltaire (via Zach Lowe)

78) “I don’t want to be a savior, I want to be a mirror.” - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

79) “I get bad Twitter FOMO but not real life FOMO. That just goes to show I need to get off the Internet.” - Josh Thomas

80) “Is there anything you love in life that you engage with seriously that you don't also engage with humor?" - Sam Sutherland, on his relationship with Blink-182

81) “My favorite genre of music is my friends' bands" - Josiah Hughes

82) “Let’s fall in love like both our parents aren’t divorced.”

83) “Seabiscuit may be the only earthling that was on both sides of the stamp.” - Brendan Kelly

84) “There’s no shame in coming in second, except in, like, wars.” - Family Guy

85) “I feel like I experience writer’s block 100% of the time, and when I do write, I have impostor syndrome.” - Phoebe Bridgers

86) “We teach based on what we most need to learn.” - psychologist on Grey’s Anatomy

87) “Having too many choices is the leading cause of stress” - Grey’s Anatomy

88) “I think we've all gravely underestimated the extent to which this year has changed all of us, permanently” - Kelli Maria Korducki

89) 

(via Twitter)

90) “I wonder if people understand why they don’t have polio” - Sandra E. Garcia

91) “Ending songs is terrible, so let’s keep singing” - Dave Hernandez

[lastsonlost]

Dear Democrats, I’m mad at you. I was raised a die-hard, bleeding-heart liberal. My grandmother was an Irish Catholic New Englander who worshipped JFK almost as much as Jesus. My dad and his nine siblings sang for the Kennedys at Hammersmith Farm.

For decades, I was a loyal regular at your bar until suddenly you started ignoring me. You took my support for granted and dismissed my concerns, focusing instead on courting the young city hipsters with their scooters and their designer weed and their craft beers. You began overlooking pragmatic moderates and catering to loud extremists who favor rewriting the Constitution and accelerating our lurch towards socialism.

So in 2016, feeling politically homeless, I dropped my party affiliation. How did this happen? How did I go from being a lifetime Democrat to a registered independent? I am far from alone:

WHY DON'T YOU DEMOCRATS SEEM TO CARE?

Like most Americans, I developed my politics through osmosis. You absorb what you grow up around. I call this unexamined position ‘factory settings’. Factory settings are the default beliefs installed when you were a child. ‘I grew up in a conservative home and so I vote Republican.’ Or ‘I hate the Yankees because I’m from Boston.’

As a young person, I could spout Democratic party lines verbatim. I didn’t care all that much. Prior to 2015, I viewed politics as something that only affected the very rich and the very poor. I wasn’t dependent on the government and tax cuts didn’t benefit me. The winner of any election had very little influence on my life. I worked as a waitress. Too busy living paycheck to paycheck, I felt like just another cog in the wheel.

For most of the 20 years in which I have been able to vote, I’ve kept my head down and voted Democrat because I believed they were the ‘party of the people’. And I was told Republicans were evil my whole life.

I understood the importance of voting, but had fallen asleep at the wheel of a self-driving car and was happy to let the autopilot navigate. It was easier. And not in a lazy, ignorant or unmotivated way — I was simply too busy trying to survive, so I rested in the default settings I was born into and trusted the geniuses in charge could work on the details.

For a long time, politicians could count on the factory-settings crowd. People know the lever they’re supposed to pull and that’s about all they’re there to do. But social media and unprecedented amounts of interconnection have added new layers that disrupt the quiet majority of factory-settings voters like me.

Having been born and raised a liberal Democrat, I had only a vague sense of the truth behind America’s political divisions. This was because of the left’s firm domination of media, entertainment and education. I subscribed to what I now call ‘The Approved Message’, a sort of ‘right-think’ that meant you were one of the good guys: a Democrat. It made for a simpler life.

Then came Trumpism. The Approved Message grew louder and angrier. It coalesced into a progressive religion, ‘Wokeism’, which adopted increasingly complex rules. Suddenly, there was no limit on what someone might deem offensive. Certain opinions, words and ideas became unacceptable overnight. Citizens took to policing one another’s jokes, tone and internet histories.

It quickly became clear that anyone who supported Trump (to be clear, I am not a fan) should be shamed and ostracized. If they were a family member, disowned. In fact, coming out as anything other than anti-Trump could end your career, get you kicked out of your mommy group or land you on the wrong side of a virtual mob.

Like most Americans, I was suddenly playing catch-up. Speech is violence, capitalism and democracy are oppressive, critical thinking is ‘fence-sitting’.

If you try nuance or engage in ‘wrong-think’ on sacred issues, you won’t just get into a tiff with the neighbors; now there’s every chance you will have your personal life dragged into the public square in order to shame you into obscurity. The days of buffet-style politics are no longer allowed. You either check all the boxes of the ‘good’ party, or you belong to the ‘bad’ one. When I dared to push back by writing articles, I was struck by how quickly the left rejected me. Millions noticed this too: they watched in stunned silence as leftists demanded books be censored, scrutinized language and called anyone who disagreed a Nazi.

Flash forward three years into a Trump administration and instead of learning from mistakes, the loudest members of the party are heading for the same brick wall. At this point the 2020 Democratic platform feels like a barely veiled threat: ��Vote for us or you’re racist.’

The progressive push to fully embody the promise made in the Declaration of Independence that ‘all men are created equal’ used to feel aspirational and attainable. Now, the open-mindedness and tolerance that attracted me to the Democratic party seems like a thing of the past. Gone is the party that stood in direct opposition to the rigid moralizing of conservatism.

In its place is a movement that feels less about liberation and more about obedience. Progressivism is no longer interested in ideological diversity and instead demands rigid adherence to dogma. Dare to defy and risk being, as we say on Twitter, ‘canceled’.

When a movement is no long open to dissent, the movement is dead. It is no longer a living, breathing dialogue. It’s a cult.

Like it or not, I’m a canary in the coal-mine. If I, a citizen of the Republic of California, have been abandoned in the center, how many people are there in Ohio? Or Florida? Or Wisconsin? I guarantee a lot more than the polls currently reflect, and a lot more than Democrats can perceive from their liberal bubble. You can’t bully people into voting the way you like and then when they push back imply they are racist and say good riddance — not if you want to survive.

So Democrats, please stop with this nonsense that people like me have left you, as you endlessly tell me on Twitter. You pushed us away. Offer us a compelling vision of the future based on the strength of your ideas and policies. If you can’t, maybe you don’t deserve to win.

[welcometofolkvang]

Marxist Propaganda in children’s media: why millennials are socialist

The nineties was an interesting decade for children’s films: the DIsney renaissance had just kicked off, giving us The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin, and computer animation was just beginning thanks to studios like Pixar and Dreamworks.

This piece will examine two films released during this period: Chicken Run (Aardman, 2000) and A Bug’s Life (Pixar, 1998) - two films with plots rooted in Marxism and workers empowerment.

Chicken Run was released at the turn of the millennium, and I, and most of my friends of the same age were subjected to it every Christmas from then on. The story centers around a group of chickens on an egg farm, but as the profits dwindle, the owners of the farm decide to branch out into making chicken pies instead. THe chickens rightfully fear for their lives, but come across a rooster (Rocky, played by Mel Brooks) who is injured but claims he is able to fly. As he heals, the chickens ask him to teach them to fly so they can escape until it is revealed he is a fraud. The chickens instead modify one of their henhouses into a plane and escape that way before any of them can be made into pies.

The first act here lays the foundation of the marxist rhetoric. The chickens are forced to produce more and more eggs and those who cannot produce enough are slaughtered. This mirrors employers forcing workers to ever produce more with: concerned only with profits and not the worker’s well-being.

The second act and the introduction of the pie-making-machine brings to light the idea that workers are disposable: the employer can bake you into a pie and will still be able to find a replacement for you. The eggs barely matter once the pie machine is running, so the value that the worker produces is just as disposable as they are. Though not a planned act of sabotage, when Ginger and Rocky destroy the pie-machine, buying more time for the chickens can be interpreted as a union negotiation which indeed buys time but is ultimately useless.

The chickens learning how to fly is the first step in their empowerment, and realising that there is more to life than endlessly laying eggs and fulfilling the farmer’s demands. They are learning to fly both physically and psychologically, dreaming of the better lives that await them beyond the farm. When Rocky’s lies are found out, they realise that this utopia of flying chickens is too good to be true… So what do they do? They take it upon themselves to fly away by constructing a plane. They take their condition into their own hands (wings): these steps represent the steps of any workers revolution: the realisation of one’s situation, negotiation and ideas for improvement and finally, revolution.

A Bug’s Life was Pixar’s second film, following Toy Story. Aside from being an ant version of Seven Samurai, it too lays out the structure of a Marxist revolution. From the very start of the film, the class hierarchy is laid out:

“The ants pick the food, the grasshoppers eat the food, the grasshoppers leave”

Some kind of agreement has been made, presumably for generations at this point, wherein the ants must first harvest food for the grasshoppers to ensure that the grasshoppers don’t destroy them, and then they are left with whatever food is leftover.

The main character, Flik, accidentally destroys the grasshopper’s portion. The grasshoppers give the ants an ultimatum: they must replace the lost food before the last leaf falls: this implies, however, that no food will be left for them.

Flik then voyages to the big city to find some warrior bugs who would be capable of fighting off the grasshoppers. He unknowingly enlists a circus troupe that he mistakes for warriors, though they play along, until they are found out not very long before the last leaf falls.

Flik then decides to use the Hopper’s biggest fear against him and builds a fake bird from leaves.

The grasshoppers attack, the plan doesn’t go entirely to plan, but we see this exchange between Hopper and Flik which sums up the plight of the workers incredibly succinctly:

Hopper : Let this be a lesson to all you ants! Ideas are very dangerous things! You are mindless, soil-shoving losers, put on this Earth to serve us!

Flik : You're wrong, Hopper. Ants are not meant to serve grasshoppers. I've seen these ants do great things, and year after year they somehow manage to pick food for themselves and you. So-so who is the weaker species? Ants don't serve grasshoppers! It's you who need us! We're a lot stronger than you say we are... And you know it, don't you?

Flik here points out how the workers are numerous enough to overthrow the ruling class but also that the ruling class depends on them, and not the other way around. This is the bottom line of every workers’ empowerment movement. The grasshoppers, in turn, belittle the worker ants, making them feel worthless and stupid: a method that worked until now.

In these two examples we can plainly see how children’s films portray Marxist ideals and even revolutions. Of course, these films are family films, so parents also enjoy them - one would think that this means that the parents also sympathize with the characters and the plot, but judging by the voting habits of over-thirties, this does not appear to be the case. It is an endless frustration that those who truly are in the position of the chickens or ants from these films empathize with the characters, but not enough to see it in their own case. They don’t realise how much like the main character they truly are, because if they did, they would have taken the same path.

[path-of-my-childhood]

Taylor Swift is the artist of the decade

By: Courteney Larocca for Insider Date: December 16th 2019

Not only has Swift been putting out No. 1 hit after No. 1 hit this decade, but her music has latched onto its listeners in deeply intimate ways. The singer has also been actively using her platform as a successful artist to shed light on injustices within the music industry to ensure a younger generation of musicians can thrive in an environment that cares about their work, as opposed to commodifies it.

Taylor Swift knows that if you're the smartest person in the room, then you're in the wrong room. Oddly enough, Swift usually is the smartest person in any room.

While the casual observer may see Swift as nothing more than a pop star, she's one of the few people who has actively been making her industry - and the lives of her fans - better in irreversible and notable ways throughout the decade.

Swift was barely 20 years old when she became the youngest artist to ever win album of the year at the Grammy Awards on January 31, 2010, for her sophomore album, "Fearless." While the album came out in late 2008, it set Swift up to become an international phenomenon over the course of the 2010s; it even landed at No. 98 on this decade's overall Billboard Hot 200 list.

Her early success made sense - audiences love a wunderkind, plus there was something so incredibly relatable about a teenager telling her crush, "you belong with me."

But for me, and other fans of Swift, it was more than that. She was someone we could see ourselves in as we navigated our own lives and romances. And with the release of "Speak Now," in late 2010, Swift proved she wasn't capable of just reinventing optimistic love stories, she had a complete grasp on heartbreak and pain, too.

Swift demonstrated her songwriting prowess early on, and her music only continued to get stronger all the way through her 2019 album, 'Lover'

"Speak Now" is an entirely self-written album that charted on the Billboard Hot 200 for 137 weeks, which was not only a huge middle finger to critics who claimed Swift didn't write her own music, but also proof she was one of the most promising songwriters of her generation.

Arming herself with lyrics like "I feel you forget me like I used to feel you breathe," and "The lingering question kept me up / Two a.m., who do you love?" Swift created a bulletproof foundation for a career built around her uncanny ability to pinpoint crucial moments of intimacy and turn them into universal anthems of heartbreak, love, and loss that became soundtracks to real fans' lives.

Obviously, the stellar music never stopped coming. With 2012 came "Red," an album that's aged so gracefully that it's landed on numerous best albums of the 2010s lists.

Swift dropped her pop masterpiece, "1989," in 2014 - an album that boasts her biggest Billboard Hot 100 hit to date, "Shake It Off," which stayed on the chart for 50 consecutive weeks. "1989" also earned Swift another album of the year win at the Grammys, making her the first woman to ever be honored with that award twice.

Swift continued her career growth with "Reputation" in 2017, which helped her break The Rolling Stones' record for highest-grossing US tour in history by earning a whopping $266.1 million. Then, capping off the decade came 2019's "Lover," an album that showcased all of Swift's immense musical talents, but stands out in her catalog as the first album that she outright owns - a triumph that goes far beyond the music itself.

It's important to note, though, that there is no singular album that can easily be delegated as the "fan favorite," largely because each album is so special within Swift's discography. If you picked seven different fans off the street, they could very easily all have a different answer to the question, "What is your favorite Taylor Swift album?"

Even critics can't fully answer that question. While "Red" is known for being critically beloved (and is my own personal favorite), Billboard had six of its writers argue for one of her first six studio albums as being her best. Also, when I ranked Swift's best and worst songs for Insider earlier this year, songs from every single one of her albums made the "best" list.

One of the reasons Swift's fans constantly latched onto her music this decade - leading to her chart-topping dominance - was because her lyrics always felt so personal, yet relatable at the same time.

Take "All Too Well," for instance. It was a deep cut tucked cleverly away at track No. 5 on "Red." It was never released as a single, but this mighty pop-rock ballad became the sort of musical zenith most artists only dream about writing.

Hearing Swift weave in intimate details about listening to her ill-fated lover's mother tell stories about his childhood or leaving her scarf at his sister's house might seem too specific to reach a larger audience outside of her piano room, but it's exactly that candor that makes Swift's best songs feel so ubiquitous.

Swift's relatability proved crucial in 2017 when it came to her impacts on societal shifts outside of the music industry

Two months before the New York Times exposé of Harvey Weinstein was published, Swift stood up in a Denver courthouse against an ex-radio DJ who groped her at a 2013 meet-and-greet and then had the gall to sue her for damages after he was fired from his job.

The phrases from her testimony, "I'm critical of your client sticking his hand under my skirt and grabbing my a--," and "I'm not going to let you or your client make me feel in any way that this is my fault," will forever be ingrained in Swift's fans' minds alongside the lyrics she wrote in her high school diaries.

After she won her symbolic $1, which she sought out for "anyone who feels silenced by a sexual assault," The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, or RAINN, told ABC that its national hotline saw a 35% increase in calls over the weekend following her testimony.

"Seeing someone that they respect, that they identify with [state they've been assaulted], has a big impact," RAINN's president Scott Berkowitz told ABC News at the time.

It's easy to look at a statistic and not think about the people behind it, but I can say that for myself, Swift played a pivotal role in how I viewed my own sexual assault.

Even before her fearless testimony, I turned to her 2010 ballad, "Dear John," for validation that I wasn't the only woman who ever counted her footsteps, praying the floor won't fall through again while dating a man with a "sick need to take love away." I later found solace in "Clean," the atmospheric "1989" closer that promises its listener that they'll one day be able to finally breathe after a roller-coaster relationship.

There's no doubt in my mind that I'm not the only one who saw their own pain reflected in Swift's lyrics, allowing them to grieve. After all, she wouldn't have become the artist with the highest-ever amount of American Music Awards, which is a fully fan-voted show, if her music was just OK.

Swift has also made strides at bettering the music industry for her fellow artists as well as herself

I won't rehash the recent legal woes brought on by Scott Borchetta selling Swift's former label Big Machine Records - and thus, all of Swift's catalog up through 2017's "Reputation" - to Scooter Braun (because who needs Big Machine anyway?). I will say that Swift fighting to own her art, and by proximity her fight for all artists to own their art, is just one example of the work she's done this decade to protect artists' rights.

You may remember that she got endlessly dragged for taking her music off Spotify or writing a letter to Apple condemning its policy of not paying artists during a three-month free trial period of Apple Music. But underneath all of the misogynistic, "she's only out for money" criticisms spat at her, you'll find she did those things to bring light to issues within her industry that hurt up-and-coming artists who don't have the millions of dollars that Swift has. Within less than 24 hours, Swift received a direct response to her open letter to Apple, saying the company had decided to reverse its decision.

When Swift chose to leave Big Machine behind in 2018, she didn't just leave for the sake of leaving. She instead negotiated a deal with Universal Music Group that not only granted her the rights to everything she would create under the label but also included a clause in her contract stipulating that "any sale of [UMG's] Spotify shares result in a distribution of money to their artists, non-recoupable."

She also said the label had agreed to this "at what they believe will be much better terms than paid out previously by other major labels."

That means that with her contract, Swift made sure other favorite artists of this decade, like Rihanna, Lady Gaga, Ariana Grande, and Kanye West, will benefit from the revenue their art brings in. The same goes for lesser-known and newer artists signed to the label.  

Even other artists have given credit to Swift for the way she changed the way we consume pop music

It's hard to imagine today's pop stars like Ariana Grande would be able to name-check their former lovers in songs like "Thank U, Next," and have them be the successful hits we know today if Swift hadn't previously crafted breakup songs like 2010's "Dear John" and 2014's "Style" that made it clear who the tracks were about - John Mayer and Harry Styles - right there in the titles.

Halsey, another artist who rose to prominence this decade, has even lionized Swift as one of her songwriting heroes, notably for her smart bridges.

"The bridge [of a song] is a fortune cookie. It pulls the whole thing together, it's the punchline, it's one of the most important parts of a song. Ask Taylor Swift, she writes the best ones in history," Halsey said in a November 2019 interview with Capital FM.

Anyone who's listened to "Out of the Woods," "Don't Blame Me," or "Lover" knows this to be true.

Swift deserves to be the artist of the decade because her music validated women while she simultaneously fought for a younger generation to make new music in a better environment

It took 13 years for Swift to come out with a track contemplating the misogynist double standards she's had to face as a woman in the music industry, and it's easy to agree with her sentiment: If Swift were a man, then she would, no doubt, be "The Man."

But while she maybe would have faced fewer obstacles and overtly sexist criticisms throughout her career if she were a man, she may not have touched as many women's lives with her music.

Being someone who has idolized Swift since I was 11 years old, I can say that the reason she matters is because not only does she produce beautifully-worded tracks that resonate with fans on extremely personal levels, but she also wants to make the world a better, fairer place - one music contract, open letter, and song lyric at a time.

And that's something that should never be shaken off.

[awesomelisaremoaner-blog]

Combatting Cummings Communications Campaign

So, here they are.

Three road-tested and ready to go campaign messages designed to strike at the wavering hearts of a few hundred thousand people in a smattering of marginal constituencies that Dominic Cummings knows he needs to win if he is to save Brexit and place Boris ‘Bozza’ Johnson on the Iron Throne of rUK until god knows when.

These simple, pared-back statements have been focus-grouped to death, and are now finely-honed weapons of mass persuasion. They are to be feared.

They will be repeated ENDLESSLY by the Conservativeratti, hoping that, over time, the statements will smash their way into the consciousnesses of ordinary people, grab ahold of their amygdalas, and squeeze a vote for the Tories out of their ordinary hands.

But there are two great things about these statements:

1.    They tell us lots about what Dominic Cummings has learnt from his focus groups

2.    They can be killed.

Let’s deal with point 2 first.

Behavioural science tells us that if you keep repeating a statement enough, eventually it will become truth. This is why Donald Trump says ‘Fake News’ a lot. If you keep repeating something that taps into people’s emotions, you will have an even easier job. And if that thing you repeat is very simple to say, job is most definitely a goodun.

These days lots of bad people on the depressing side of politics have worked this out, and the internet is abuzz with the sounds of bite-size populist sentiments pouring unwantedly into the minds of defenceless populaces, from Budapest to Beijing.

BUT – behavioural science also tells us how to effectively debunk these unhealthy mind viruses, strip them of their power and turn them into weapons that actually do the opposite of what was originally intended, like a re-programmed Terminator.

This was done to some effect in the 2017 election, when Theresa May’s ‘Strong and Stable’ message gradually became paired with a ‘Weak and Wobbly’ counter-message (on t’internet at least), which – allied with her increasingly wobbly performances - made repeating the phrase more of a liability than a strength. By the end of the campaign they had stopped using it altogether.

And that’s what we are going to try and do this time around – take super-villian Dominic’s campaign messages apart, and reconstitute them as something remain-y.

This is an eminently winnable fight. The Conservative victory absolutely depends on getting the kind of people who hate Brexit but also hate Jeremy Corbyn and thought Ed Miliband was a bit wet to say ‘fuck it, there’s no one else, I have to vote for Boris fucking Johnson because I am a Conservative voter’.

whereas, our victory depends on getting these lovely people to say “I don’t feel good about voting for Boris Johnson, and I never wanted Brexit anyway.” And then either voting for someone else or just going to the pub and saying fuck it all and not voting.

By the way - they are not going to vote for Corbyn, okay?

I know loads of these people, and so do you. They feel politically homeless and are ripe for conversion.

So, what does behavioural science say about how exactly you counter Dominic’s misinformation? Well, there are certain key principles:

1.    Never re-state the myth. In 2017, too many people would say “it doesn’t sound very ‘Strong and Stable’ if you can’t turn up to your own debate. Sounds more like weakness”. This is wrong, wrong, wrong. All you are doing is strengthening the phrase ‘Strong and stable’ in someone’s mind. No, instead you must have a…

2.    Persuasive alternative counter message. Which you repeat anytime you come across the original. This counter message should directly relate to the original message (e.g. ‘weak and wobbly’ scans like ‘strong and stable’), and it should contradict its impact.

3.    It should be simply expressed

4.    It should be framed to appeal to YOUR audience.

So, let’s look at the three Conservative statements and see what they can tell us about how to destroy them. Here they are:

1.    We will get Brexit done by October 31st

2.    We are the Party of the people

3.    We will take this country forward.

I am going to deal with the last one first, as I think this is the common theme that will underpin a lot of what the Tories try to do over the next few weeks.

We will take this country forward

It’s clear that much of the clash and thunder of Bozza’s arrival in Number 10 over the last few weeks have been about creating the illusion of busyness and purpose. ‘At least he is doing something’ cries Dominic’s target audience, and this message is designed to appeal further to that powerful sentiment of frustration.

This central idea of forward momentum, impetus, activity, inevitability is going to be big for the Tories. They will complain that they were dragged into an election they did not want, and only they, not the squabbling remainers or even parliament as a whole, have the sense of initiative to get us out of the morass.

And it makes some intuitive sense. They do have a plan (a stupid, self-serving one), and they are certainly very focused on winning over the next few weeks (for the benefit of the Conservative party if not the country). So, you can’t challenge this myth by saying, “no, you are not going forward”. They are most definitely in motion.

What you have to say instead is “But they are heading in the wrong direction.”

It’s that simple: “The Tories are steering Britain in the wrong direction.”

Easy. Say that whenever you hear this ‘going forward’ line, and it will become a rock of Kryptonite around the neck for them.

Or, in the mocked-up parody campaign posters: ‘We are taking this country in the wrong direction” under a big picture of Boris’ mug.

Of course, you will have to be able to justify why you think they are pointing us in the wrong direction – but as soon as you do that you have WON, because now we are not talking about ‘forward’, but about ‘wrong direction’.

And it’s easy to justify, because not only is Brexit a BAD thing, but also they are spectacularly unprepared for any of the logistical issues of either shit Brexit, or terrifically shit Brexit, PLUS they are not going to get any meaningful changes to a thrice-rejected deal so we are either going to be a vassal state or watching fist fights breakout in chemists all over the country over the availability of Epipens  or both.

See – wrong direction.

Which brings me to point 1.

We will get Brexit done by October 31st

So, once again, the way to deal with this is not to say ‘no, you won’t’, or ‘it’s a coup and the Queen will stop you’ or anything else silly – that will not appeal to our target audience.

The power of this statement comes from (1) implying that the endless debates and fannying about around Brexit will be over if we just lie back and let Bozza get on with it, and (2) that this is not such a bad thing after all – in fact it’s all fine and we might as well be cheered by his jollying, can-do demeanour rather be positively sickened by it.

It’s key to challenge this ‘not such a bad thing after all’ emotion with its converse – Brexit is in fact a terrible, terrible thing (for many of the reasons listed above).

To this end, we have had a stroke of good luck, courtesy of Theresa May no less, who managed to delay the date of Brexit doom to October 31st. Or Halloween.

Yes, Halloween.

Brexit is coming on Halloween.

And thus it is easy to pair evil with evil in the mind of the floating voter.

There are many possible permutations, e.g.:

·     Boris’ Halloween Horror Show is coming

·     It’ll be a real fright night this Halloween

·     Don’t let your kids see what Weird Uncle Boris has planned for them, etc.

The important thing is to pair the October the 31st thing with fear.

And yes, here at last we can use Project Fear to our advantage. If someone mentions it, we can say “Yes, it is Project Fear – because Boris is about to make Project Fear a reality – on Halloween... Steve Barclay said last week they haven’t even started talking yet about how to keep car parts supply chains running after Brexit – WTF?!”

See – turn their weapons on them.

This can be fun, this can be playful. We can make memes where Boris is a scary clown. We can make jokes. We can make deep fakes.

The important thing is October 31st stops being a nothingburger, and starts being something that people might want to think carefully about before rushing headlong into it.

So we have:

·     Boris’ Halloween Horror Show is coming

·     He’s steering Britain in the wrong direction!

I think these two ideas play well off what I imagine are Bozza’s brand weaknesses - his underlying associations with being reckless, slapdash, mendacious and spivvy. Our target voter has all these doubts about him too.

We are the Party of the people

So this is the Tories attempt to roll their tanks on to traditional Labour territory, by indicating that they are the true champions of the 2016 popular vote, PLUS this probably also encapsulates their crowd pleasing policies on the NHS, policing and crime.

You can’t challenge this by pointing out (as I am sure Labour supporters are minded to do) that no they are bloody not the Party of the people. Trying to explain who actually influences Tory policy and how that tends not to benefit the person in the street is all a bit ‘yawn’ and won’t actually register with disengaged voters.

No, we need something cleverer and something that skewers the meaning at the heart of the message.

I think the solution is two fold:

One – the statement refers to ‘the people’ like we were one big homogenous mass of dutiful subjects, but the truth is vast swathes of the country are not reconciled to Brexit and never will be. They are in open rebellion against their flagship policy.

Most polls show more than 50% support for remain these days – so even those soft Tory voters who are leaning towards voting for him for want of any other obvious candidate do not feel truly represented by him.

Boris is acting like he is the unifying figure that can bring the country back together, and this is where we must challenge the statement. He is not uniting us at all. We are a divided people.

And this gives us the key to unravel the second part of the sentence – that reference to the big P Conservative Party.

The sentence implies that the Conservative party is acting with one voice (trying desperately to draw on that ‘stability’ that they have long ago squandered) – but the plain truth is they are divided too.

MPs are resigning, others are in open rebellion and the executive is calling for de-selection. They, like the people are split down the middle.

So there you have it:

“A divided party can never unite our country”.

The final message:

·     Boris’ Halloween Horror Show is coming

·     His divided party can never unite our country

·     He’s steering Britain in the wrong direction!

Getting the message out

It’s clear from 2016 that Dominic has lots of whizzy tools for targeting his message where it needs to go, and you may not.

But you do know soft Tories, lots of them.

What you need to do now is to deliver this message – by sharing it on social media – into the heart of the conversation about who should run our country so it changes the dialogue and makes everything they try to do work against them.

You are like Han Solo flying the Millenium Falcon deep inside the Death Star, Frodo lobbing Gollum into the Cracks of Doom, Arya pulling the knife-drop trick on the Night King. Watch the waves of destruction spread.

Thanks for listening and good luck.

[thesinglesjukebox]

KACEY MUSGRAVES - RAINBOW

[6.25]

And we close the week with the Golden girl of the Grammys.

Edward Okulicz: On Golden Hour, this feels like an unnecessary coda tacked on; after the beautiful resolution of the title track, the record didn't need another song about everything being alright. Also in that context, I find the second verse's pat rhymes to be a bit gloopy and childish. Taken as a song on its own merits, though, it really works, but almost any other performer wouldn't have the empathetic character to sell it. And she does sell it, because the chorus is one hell of a warming hug. There's a fine line between touching and glurge, and this is on the right side of it. I hope it becomes a sizeable hit so Kacey can strip-mine her wonderful album for further singles until she hits "Love is a Wild Thing." [8]

Alex Clifton: "Rainbow" revisits the theme of "Silver Lining," the opening track from Musgraves's first album, in a much different light. "Silver Lining" is a song about someone who's so afraid to live normally and find happiness that they shoot themselves in the foot by never even trying. "Rainbow" is more about someone who can't try because they're too sad to do so. "Silver Lining" is a buck-up song, one to remind you on the hardest days that you've got to do the big scary things because there's no other way to live, while "Rainbow" is its gentle, kind cousin that reminds you to be careful and tender with yourself. It's a simple, affecting song, just vocals and piano, and yet it never feels sappy; it's the equivalent of being hugged by someone you love. Uplifting songs are really hard to balance, but "Rainbow" stands out with its restraint. It's quiet and honest, and that makes it all the more beautiful. [8]

Katherine St Asaph: When Kacey Musgraves sang "Rainbow" on the Grammys -- only the goddamn Grammys would stick her with this slush when "High Horse" is right! there! -- I had to swear about four times to the person watching with me some variation of "no, wait, I promise she's actually good." The reason: "Rainbow" is the kind of piano ballad that is usually a showcase for divas. To quote Musgraves' album, it's pageant material. So the understated charm of her vocals, so perfect on "Slow Burn" or "Lonely Weekend" or "Oh, What a World," here comes off as fourth-rate Whitney Houston, particularly since she swallows most of the high notes. [1]

Alfred Soto: Suspicious about the consensus building around Golden Hour, I hoped Grammy audiences would get "High Horse" or "Wonder Woman," one of the well-wrought miniatures to which fans had run as if the songs were roaring fireplaces in January. Instead, "Rainbow" offers the poised, broadly scaled empathy that conservatives mock on social media -- I'm surprised Carrie Underwood didn't cover it on her last album. Folks, if you want to convert Kacey Musgraves skeptics this ain't what you're looking for. [3]

Nortey Dowuona: Firm, warm and heavy piano twists and turns, Kacey's empathetic, warm croon soars into the sky, spreading a rainbow behind her. [8]

Thomas Inskeep: The final track on Golden Hour is a pretty ballad, just a piano and Musgraves' voice singing some really beautiful lyrics. And that sums it up tidily: your reaction will largely be based on how you feel about such stripped-down balladry; I'm good with it on occasion, especially when sung by a voice as attractive as this one. [7]

Stephen Eisermann: This song will mean a million things to a million different people and that's part of the reason why it's so great, but I've always looked at it as a nod to the gay community. Kacey has regularly spoken about her allyship and the lyrics seem like the perfect thing to tell a closeted teen boy growing up in a Mexican Catholic home; what I wouldn't have given to hear this wonderful woman singing to me that there is a rainbow above despite all the worry and weight I was carrying. Kacey's sincerity shines through and provides all the warmth that the sparse piano arrangement allows for and you can't help but be impressed by the vulnerability of the vocal she provides. Like a rainbow after a heavy storm, this song is a necessary light after a lot of darkness. [8]

Joshua Minsoo Kim: Would've preferred that Kacey ended her album with "Golden Hour." Would've also preferred that "Golden Hour" (or anything else, really) was sung at the Grammys and became her new single. What we got instead was a plain piano ballad, her own "Yesterday." The image that's conjured up with raincoats, umbrellas, and rainbows makes plainness its virtue: a song so universal that it's well-suited as a lullaby for crying newborns. It's a sweet sentiment, but most of its power comes in how any person could have made this feel personal. The reverb helps. [4]

Iris Xie: I love, love, love, ballads. But this is unbearably flat, spare, and sounds childish. Maybe when the ASPCA finally stops using that Sarah McLachlan song, they could switch over to this. [2]

Matias Taylor: The gorgeous melody paired with Kacey's songwriting voice (unpretentious but endlessly clever and resonant) makes the song genuinely uplifting, making it feel like we'vejust discovered a universal but forgotten truth by tuning into her words. Kacey expresses comfort as always within our own reach, as simple as realizing that things aren't always as bad as they seem, and the perfectly executed metaphor is an ideal match for the simple elegance of this track and the rest of its parent album. [9]

Jacob Sujin Kuppermann: If singer-songwriters are going to persist in the production of tasteful, unadventurous ballads, I can only hope that they put as much care into them as Kacey Musgraves & Co put into "Rainbow." It works for the same reason the rest of her catalog does -- not necessarily because of any shocking innovation in the form but a good-hearted, detail-filled ethic that suffuses the whole enterprise with a certain joy. Is it the best song on Golden Hour? Certainly not. But it's the best of its kind, and a beautifully written piece regardless. [7]

Will Adams: "You're depressed," my therapist said, pausing for effect. I didn't know how to respond; it was so direct and simple. Everything to that point felt like a fog, perhaps a storm cloud, of circular thoughts I'd wrapped around myself: the recognition that something was wrong but the inability to name it; the fact that the last time I felt truly happy was when I was nineteen, but the theory that this was just a part of growing up; the fear that every single person in my life was simultaneously staring right at me in judgment and looking the other way in embarrassment; the notion that I desperately needed to talk to someone, the admission that no one would care. And in half a second, it was distilled into a single point of clarity. I could almost feel the clouds part in me. That was in summer of last year, after I'd heard Golden Hour and its closing track, "Rainbow." I'd appreciated its clear sound and uplifting message, and it hit the soft spot I have for album-ending ballads. But sometime after that meeting, I listened again. I burst into tears. It felt as if Kacey were singing directly to me, reaching out for my shoulder as it heaved, and guiding me toward the sun. Therapy is grueling -- I often left sessions with a headache, a scratchy throat, or both, after unraveling myself in front of a stranger, pouring out years of bottled sadness, frustration and fear. As good as it felt to release it in the room, I would walk to my car with the words still swirling, the amount of work I still had to do towering over me. I kept going. I kept talking. I started a prescription. The anxiety persists, but I can resist it better. "Rainbow" remains the keepsake from my 2018, a safe harbor to return to for three minutes if ever thunder threatens me. "It'll all be all right," Kacey sings, and it means everything to finally be able to believe that. [10]

[Read, comment and vote on The Singles Jukebox]

[legenwaitforitdarythoughts]

Is social media good for politics?

The topic of social media and politics is not something I had given much thought to before now. Yes, it’s hard to ignore how with one tweet, Donald Trump can cost a company billions or worry that one of his Twitter rants might be the start of a world war, but beyond that, I figure it’s the digital age, and anyone not embracing social media quickly becomes irrelevant. However, upon digging deeper into this topic, I realised how much an impact social media has had on modern politics.

Pinpointing ten ways in which social media has affected politics Murse (2018) highlighted how, thanks to social media, politicians can seamlessly deliver their message to a broader audience in real-time and at low-cost. Additionally, Loader & Mercea (2011), attribute social media for creating a participatory political culture where people no longer need to be ‘passive consumers’ but instead are ‘enabled to challenge discourses, share alternative perspectives and publish their own opinions.’ But is participatory politics improving democracy?

Muller (2018) and Trounson (2016) both agree that social media both strengthens democracy by allowing the public to hold those in prominent positions to account for their actions, whilst also weakening democracy through the increased dissemination of false information, xenophobia and propaganda.

As television series House of Cards character, Frank Underwood aptly says, “We are nothing more or less than what we choose to reveal.” Yes, the problem with social media lies in the ability for politicians and lobby groups to control the narrative and exploit 'confirmation bias' through what Eli Pariser coined the ‘filter bubble’ algorithms built into social media platforms used to tailor messages based on an individual's likes, interests, location, etc. (Hull 2017). Further, Dr Aaron Martin (cited in Trounson 2016), argues that where traditional media exposed people to a range of topics, social media is instead creating an ‘echo chamber’ where ‘individual prejudices are endlessly reinforced’ without any differing points of view.

In my own experience, I have seen how politicians try to control the narrative. Only last year, a local politician posted the headline of an article on their Facebook page with the goal of sledging their opposition to win over voters. When my husband shared his opinion by pointing out the inaccuracy of the information along with how wrong it was to use false news to push their agenda, his comment was subsequently deleted, and he was blocked from the page.

Because of false information sharing, according to recent polls, people are losing trust in social media as a source of news and information and turning back to traditional media (Muller 2018). Jericho (2013) states that the centrifugal nature of social media will only be overcome when politicians and lobby groups ‘forego the need to completely control the debate and instead avail themselves of its open culture’.

To sum up, I feel that social media has strong potential to be a tool for political information sharing, open debate and discussion, however, it is up to our politicians to use it in the right way and not just for furthering their own interests. Will this ever happen? Given the nature of politics, I say no.

References

Hull, G 2017, ‘Why social media may not be so good for democracy’, The Conversation, 6 November, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://theconversation.com/why-social-media-may-not-be-so-good-for-democracy-86285>.

Jericho, G 2013, 'How many votes are there on Twitter?', in The Rise of the Fifth Estate, Scribe, Victoria, Australia, ProQuest Ebook Central, <http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/swin/detail.action?docID=1020873>.

Knoll, T 2016, ‘20 House Of Cards Quotes That Get Me Through Life...and I hope motivate you likewise’, Odyssey, 3 October, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://www.theodysseyonline.com/20-house-of-cards-that-get-me-through-life>.

Loader, B.D & Mercea, D 2011, ‘NETWORKING DEMOCRACY? Social media innovations and participatory politics INTRODUCTION’, Information Communication & Society, Vol.14, no. 6, pp. 757-769.

Muller, D 2018, ‘Why social media is in the doghouse for both politicians and the public’, ABC News, 15 February, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-14/social-media-is-in-the-doghouse-for-politicians-and-public/9446894>.

Murse, T 2018, ‘How Social Media Has Changed Politics 10 Ways Twitter and Facebook Have Altered Campaigns’, ThoughtCo., 1 June, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://www.thoughtco.com/how-social-media-has-changed-politics-3367534>.

Trounson, A 2016, ‘Social media politics: for and against’, Election Watch - Australia 2016, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://electionwatch.unimelb.edu.au/australia-2016/articles/social-media-politics-for-and-against>.

Images

‘16 Badass House Of Cards Quotes’ [image] in Google Images, viewed 21 December 2018, <https://goo.gl/images/zfdCD3>.

‘Political cartoon meme’ [image] in Hill, G 2016, ‘The Trouble With Mass Debating On Social Media’, Gareth J Hill, 24 June, viewed 21 December 2018, <http://www.garethjhill.com/the-trouble-with-mass-debating-on-social-media/>.

[bigskydreaming]

So, disclaimer at the top here that I’m white and aiming the following questions at other white users who are taking the Russian blogs thing and running with it in all the wrong directions. That said.... 

The question shouldn’t be: Are these 84 pro-BLM blogs that tumblr deleted Russian trolls?

At least, that shouldn’t be the only question. 

Of just as much importance is: Why are we only hearing about 84 pro-BLM blogs being deleted for being Russian trolls? Why is the media running with the story about tumblr being ‘home to a powerful, largely unrevealed network of Russian trolls focused on black issues and activism’?

Like, okay. Let’s assume for a minute that all 84 of the blogs tumblr deleted were in fact Russian trolls and bots posing as black activists. 

But where are the rest of the Russian troll blogs?

You know, all the ones we’ve been hearing about for the PAST YEAR AND A HALF. When the knowledge that Russian trolls and bots have been spreading Fake News and pro-Trump and anti-HRC propaganda for months leading up to the election has been there ever since the election? 

Where are all the rightwing conservative blogs that were actually Russian trolls in disguise? Where are the Neo Nazi blogs that were actually Russian trolls in disguise? Where are all the blogs that were aimed at stirring up and radicalizing conservative or undecided white tumblr users?

We know that those blogs are there too. We literally know there is evidence that targeting right wing users of social media was a major aim of the Russian troll/bot farms, if not THE major aim.

Is it possible they cast their net widely and diversified their tactics, leading them to create superficially liberal blogs where they posed as black or pro-black activists in order to create dissent among the left? Sure, absolutely. Every one of those 84 blogs named as linked to the IRA could possibly be a Russian troll, sure.

But here’s the thing: according to everything we’ve been hearing for the past year and a half straight, there were thousands upon thousands of Russian trolls and bots aimed at generating fake news and misinformation to keep conservatives riled up. And yet.....when tumblr, notorious for not giving a single shit no matter how many times PoC or other marginalized users come to them with screencaps and physical evidence of Neo-Nazi blogs and the like running campaigns of harassment against them....when THAT tumblr finally comes forward and in an unprecedented move for them provides a list of confirmed Russian troll blogs....

It’s not pro-Trump, conservative, hate group, Neo Nazi blogs. Nope. it’s 84 pro-black activism blogs.

Umm. C’mon. Really? You’re really sitting there not thinking there’s anything kinda suspiciously backwards about that?

Like.....whether those blogs are actually legit or not isn’t even that relevant at this point, y’know? It’s kinda just as big of a deal that for ‘some reason’, the first time tumblr decided to put on its Nancy Drew hat and go digging around for fake troll blogs, they either decided to focus their efforts on looking into black activism blogs instead of like, Neo Nazi blogs....or else if they had knowledge of both conservative and liberal Russian troll blogs, they still for ‘some reason’ decided to focus on revealing and pushing forward the black activism blogs they uncovered as fake. And yes, I realize that part of this ‘investigation’ or whatever was twitter uncovering bots/trolls with the same names as blogs hosted on tumblr, and sharing those names with tumblr led to the site determining that they were trolls as well. But either way? Same problem. There are Russian trolls aimed at white users on the site, stirring them up and radicalizing them with hate speech, racist rhetoric, and the like, and apparently there are Russian trolls aimed at black users on the site, posting BLM and anti-police brutality content....and tumblr picked which was of bigger concern to them, and prioritized accordingly.

Which leads right into the second problem, and the next big question we should be asking ourselves: What purpose did this serve? Who benefits?

Like, its also just as big a problem that freaking BUZZFEED, in its Pulitzer-worthy reporting, along with several other news sites by now, decided that this was a story, a big story, and the angle to takeaway from it was: ‘tumblr is home to a powerful, largely unrevealed network of Russian trolls focused on black issues and activism’.

Digest that for a second. According to Buzzfeed, 84 Russian trolls masquerading as black activism blogs are a powerful network. Here’s the thing though.....the reason all the Russian trolls spreading fake news and misinformation among right wing social media circles is such a problem is...IT’S FAKE NEWS. IT’S LIES. THE INFORMATION THEY SPREAD ISN’T TRUE.

Look at everything Buzzfeed and tumblr et al’s investigative journalism turned up though when they dug into these fake black activism blogs or whatever. I read every article written up about these 84 blogs so far. I clicked on every link citing prof of how these blogs encouraged black users and other PoC not to vote for HRC. Problem is? Out of all of it, the only thing on those blogs I found cited as actually being misinformation was when one of them posted a video about a black girl being harassed by a cop and INCORRECTLY LABELED THAT COP A MEMBER OF THE NYPD. That’s it. That was all the misinformation. A video about a cop harassing a black girl being mislabeled as to where the cop was from.

Everything else spread by those blogs though? Actual, sourceable, verifiable news. Those articles made a big deal about how one blog got a ton of notes after posting a clip of HRC’s infamous super predators quote and calling her a monster for it. But like....she actually said that though? It wasn’t fake news? Just like the reactions of any black user who saw that and thought hey fuck you is reasonable and legitimate regardless of whether it was posted on a ‘real’ activism blog or a Russian troll blog? 

Then add to that the fact that if you actually LOOK at polling data from the election, black voters and other voters of color pretty much ALL showed up to vote for HRC anyway, despite how they felt about her, and we all got screwed over because it was white people who looked at those posts and used them as an excuse not to vote for her.

So any which way you cut it, there is no angle in which those 84 blogs, even IF they really are Russian trolls, actually constitute some powerful network of misinformation which as the articles try and infer, leads to the conclusion that PS, we were right all along guys, BLM cost Hillary the election.

Yeah, reality is, at most, those blogs spread largely accurate information about HRC that confirmed what many black users already thought or felt about her and her policies but didn’t actually affect their willingness to show up and vote for her anyway if that was what it took to try and keep Trump out of office. Just like, at most, those blogs spread largely verifiable and accurate information about police brutality (including actual photographic and video content), which only confirmed what most pro-BLM users following those blogs already knew and thought? 

The source of posts that aren’t actually made up of misinformation doesn’t actually invalidate content that’s, y’know...accurate information. And YET. Twitter, tumblr, Buzzfeed, and many users all seem pretty comfortable thinking that the shocking discoveries and implications extending from the reveal of these 84 blogs is far more important and newsworthy than like, uncovering Russian troll blogs spreading active misinformation among white supremacist hate groups hosted on the site.

The implicit takeaway is that if Russian trolls have invaded our social media spaces, we’re in far more danger as a result of any resentments they might foster or encourage among pro-BLM users protesting police brutality and white supremacist hate crimes, than from say, any resentments those trolls might foster or encourage among white users who already harbor violent racist ideologies. Like the Parkland shooter, who was reported to be openly antisemitic. Or the Austin bomber, who had a history of racist behavior. Or many, many others.

At the end of the day, tumblr unveiling these particular 84 blogs as Russian trolls changes nothing about the state of our government. Changes nothing about our relationship with Russia. Changes nothing about anything UNLESS you draw the conclusion from it that huh, if those pro-BLM blogs were fake, who knows how many others are, maybe they all are, maybe BLM or police brutality ISN’T that big of a deal.

Regardless of the true nature of those blogs, the problem here actually has very little to do with Russia, or Trump, or the election. It’s a problem we’ve perpetuated endlessly throughout our history in this country, and we don’t have any excuse for falling for it anymore. This is simply someone offering us a narrative that lets us justify not caring about something that for whatever reason, many of us don’t really seem to want to care about. And predictably, many of us are leaping at that justification, flimsy as it is. 

Like....don’t. Just think about it honestly. Ask: what did this ACTUALLY accomplish. Who did it ACTUALLY benefit. 

And if the answer you come up with is ‘any white person who wants an excuse to stay detached from black issues without feeling guilty about it’, like....stop uncritically reblogging posts that are not so subtly implying that all pro-BLM blogs and black activism blogs should be regarded with suspicion.

[oneweekoneband]

For a while, Taylor Swift was America’s sweetheart but not anymore. Nowadays, people tend to hate Taylor Swift, sometimes for valid reasons but often for ridiculous ones. Personally, I’m pro-Taylor generally speaking but I like to regard myself as generally pretty balanced in my appreciation for her as an artist and a person. But that being said, I don’t like “Look What You Made Me Do” very much even though I do think it’s catchy and great to walking up hills to. I think it is one of the weaker songs on the album thematically speaking and falls into the trap of being too much about Taylor herself to be truly relatable.

As Hilary Collins writes in her excellent TinyLetter, 

“Taylor is the queen of lying to herself, the queen of knowing that everyone thinks she’s crazy and needy and slutty and can’t keep a man, and turning that gossip into romanticized versions of herself. Over the years she’s painted herself as, at different times, either an innocent, naive, young victim who has been betrayed repeatedly by people with bad intentions (“Dear John”, “Mean”, “Bad Blood”), or a catty, whipsmart bitch who can take care of herself (“Better than Revenge”, “Picture to Burn”, half of “Reputation”). These two personas aren’t really mutually exclusive for her, but seem to be a kind of before and after the hard times embittered her.

Taylor is unique because she both has a point and doesn’t. She is undoubtedly the victim of both unrelenting, banal misogyny from the media and some bad behavior from boyfriends (I can’t imagine John Mayer was any kinder or more gracious than she allows us to believe), but she has often cried wolf to play the victim to people who aren’t victimizing her, and the two most famous examples are black artists—Kanye and Nicki Minaj. After losing the Kanye feud, Taylor went from shittalking her exes from time to time to full-fledged rage machine, doing bad things and blaming it on her enemies, who are legion. This is why we can’t have nice! things! she sings, and what makes me love Taylor is that it’s so much fun how she sees the world. It’s aestheticized, her against them, and anytime she does something bad, she was goaded into it.

I’m not interested in parsing the morality of Taylor Swift’s worldview as presented in her body of work and public persona. I’m interested the psychology of young women who are labeled slutty and crazy and the way those women try to wrest the narrative back into their control. I’m interested in the way that being a young woman often feels like being on stage and forced to perform a role you’ve never read and knowing that you’re going to fuck it up no matter how you do it.”

As Collins implies, the songs on reputation fall into one of two categories: romantic and intimate a la “Dress” or “Delicate” and the sharp, biting angry kind, which includes “Don’t Blame Me” or “This is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things” or yes, “Look What You Made Me Do.” In my opinion anyway, Taylor absolutely excels at the former while the latter seems to fall short. I don’t necessarily dislike all those songs but well, there’s a reason that apart from this one, I am not writing extensively on them this week. I just don’t have real feelings towards them because her anger strikes me as performative the way her hesitation and romanticism and love does not. But I feel like if I was in a different frame of mind, I would probably grow to appreciate them.  

I admire the gumption of Taylor in “Look What You Made Me Do” but the thing is, she’s definitely in the wrong at least in what she is referring to. She lied about not knowing about the lyrics of Kanye West’s “Famous” ahead of time for whatever reason and that was dishonest. That being said, Kanye depicting Taylor Swift as well as his ex Amber Rose naked and in the same bed as abusers like Chris Brown in the video for “Famous” is nothing short of abject misogyny but that’s how Kanye always works. While he often has a point and poignant rationale for his behavior, he takes it too far, similar to Taylor herself. 

As a woman of color who’s been a fan of Taylor Swift since like 2006, her lack of political activism sometimes frustrates me but doesn’t irk me in the same way it bothers other people. The thing is, I don’t get my politics from celebrities! My political acumen comes from other sources than rich white women and I find it much more interesting to talk about Taylor in terms of her emotional resonance and how people perceive her public and private personas rather than endlessly debating whether she voted for Donald Trump in the last election. I don’t think we’re ever going to find out who she voted for, but that being said, if she did vote for Trump (which I admittedly highly doubt), I probably will stop listening to her music because that’s the line for me personally. I just don’t fixate on it because I don’t think Taylor has or will ever be the kind of political powerhouse some of her fans want her to be and I would rather enjoy her music.

The thing about Taylor Swift is that , the things people criticize about her are often the wrong things. I think it’s perfectly appropriate to question why she hasn’t disavowed her Neo-Nazi fanbase for instance or even to call out her treatment of Kanye West to an extent and how she played up the imago of white victimhood. But, I dislike those who take it a step further (Anne-Helen Peterson of BuzzFeed, I’m looking directly at you) and use the term “playing the victim,” condemning her for writing about the people in her life and calling out her white privilege all the while ignoring that they benefit from white privilege as well! I get the appeal of writing articles about how Taylor Swift is overtly privileged and white but if the writer is also white, isn’t that kind of hypocritical? Maybe spend time thinking about how white women are complicit in white men’s racism instead or spend more time improving your own “wokeness” rather than writing rambling, badly constructed diatribes on pop stars. That’s just my personal take on it though, feel free to disagree, but please, for the love of God stop linking me to that awful BuzzFeed article (which one? All of them).

But in short, “Look What You Made Me Do” isn’t a great song, not the best on this album and not remotely close to the best Taylor Swift has written. I think it brings up interesting elements of Taylor Swift’s public persona and how she has been treated by the media but that’s the extent of it. As for the video, I enjoyed it aesthetically but wasn’t a huge fan of it thematically and thought it was attempting to be comic and failing. I feel like the only people that can truly relate to what she is talking about are the past Taylors. I’m not someone who claims that relatability should be the ultimate goal for an artist but at the same time, this overt fixation on the self without a consideration for others or how she will be perceived is far from appealing. 

In any case, I would much rather listen to “Dress” on repeat than spend my time thinking about who Taylor is referring to in “Look What You Made Me Do” and that’s just how the cookie crumbles. 

[movieswithkevin27]

Keeper of the Flame

When Keeper of the Flame was released in 1943, it seemed as though everybody was lining up to hate the film. Even director George Cukor stated that the film’s ending was not that good with Katharine Hepburn embodying everything that made the general public hate her in the 1930s. The head of MGM was incensed that they had financed such a picture. Republicans decried it for its leftist politics, leading them to calling on the head of the Production Code to ban such a picture from being made for how it equates being rich with being fascist. Of course, Keeper of the Flame does nothing of the sort, Hepburn is brilliant, and the ending is what makes the film such a brilliant work from Cukor even if he does not know it. Portraying the death of a charismatic political leader, the aftermath, and then the mystery surrounding his death leading to the great reveal - that he was not all he was made up to be in the public eye - Keeper of the Flame shows the dangers the future held for America. In viewing Nazi Germany, many Americans thanked their lucky stars and said, “Good thing that could never happen here.” Portraying a war reporter returning to the United States, Spencer Tracy’s Steven O’Malley is even asked why he is back in the States, as there is no war there. Yet, as the film argues about a secret hand in politics made up of men who want nothing but power and will sow division and discord, amongst the unwitting public in an attempt to pit hatred against hatred, Keeper of the Flame shows there is a war to be fought. It is not a film preaching leftist ideals nor is it one that is anti-American. Instead, it is a film that warns about fascism draped in American flag. It is a warning we ignored as the film was roundly rejected by Republicans (the film never even calls the dead fascist a Republican, but I guess this one hit a little too close to home, eh?) and faced backlash even in the studio (again, a little too close to home for the Hollywood elite, eh?). Tell the truth and the guilty will take issue, apparently.

It is this ending in which the secrets behind Robert Forrest are revealed that Keeper of the Flame becomes so impactful and it is, in large part, because of Katharine Hepburn. As the sound all around her dies down, Forrest’s widow Christine (Hepburn) tells every secret he had to hard-nosed journalist Steven O’Malley. Revealing his plans to put elements of society against one another through “fake news” articles to be run in specifically targeted publications - examples such as an anti-semitic piece, an anti-urbanite piece to run in the Farmers Gazette, anti-black stories, or an anti-poor story - and the way in which this mountain of a man came to believe in his own god-like status bestowed upon him by the public, Hepburn’s monologue is achingly beautiful. It is heavy-handed, yes, but it is necessarily heavy-handed. These are not ideals that can be left to suggestion or thematic development and writer Donald Ogden Stewart wisely recognizes this fact. Instead, it must be said. It must be a rallying cry to “keep the flame” burning. The public is smart, but nothing can be left to chance. They must know there is a secret group of fascists within American borders who sell pro-American ideals as being that of hatred of others, animosity, and racial superiority. They must know there is a plot to install soulless men who want nothing but power and wealth into political office where they will sell themselves and their vote to the highest bidder. There is a plot to leave the public poorly educated, apathetic, build up beliefs in public officials as being god-like, and stoking our childish desire to blame others for our ills. It is a powerfully written call to action that, like all of the best speeches and monologues that hit too close to the mark, fell on deaf ears in 1943. Hepburn’s impassioned delivery of the monologue serves as the emotional climax of the film as she explains her hatred for what her beloved husband had become once he, too, came to believe himself worthy of being worshipped. It may be on-the-nose, but it is its power and delivery that makes it come off so authentically and emotionally. This is, largely, due to Hepburn who deserves great plaudits role in this film.

Until this moment, however, Keeper of the Flame is a mystery drama film. Portraying the death of Forrest, showing the national mourning that occurs, and then the efforts of journalists to interview Christine that are consistently met with a locked gate, Keeper of the Flame creates great mystery and intrigue. The only man capable of breaking through is Steven O’Malley, whose writing was greatly admired by Robert Forrest before his political swing that came to define his life at the end. In a classic role for Tracy - a man in a position to “right a wrong” in society or politics and crusading to create this impact - he is able to smooth talk his way into the estate of Forrest where he is able to win over Christine to gain the rights to pen the biography about Forrest. Once given access, however, he stumbles on some oddity. Christine acts quite weird around her male cousin, who is established as having hated Robert. The gatekeeper’s daughter became quite taken with Robert, only to be sent off to a sanitarium following a nervous breakdown. The gatekeeper’s young son cries daily and has made himself sick because he believes he could have saved Robert as he knew the bridge - which Robert’s car fell through - had collapsed by the phones were out due to a storm so he could not tell him. Robert’s elderly mother claims he was murdered. Christine’s story about her whereabouts that evening do line up either. All of this leads to a suspicion of murder, infidelity, sabotage, and the brutal back-stabbing of a great man. The painful reveal that, while some of these may have some mild truth, that none of what the world knew about Forrest was actually true hits Tracy’s righteous character like a ton of bricks. However, in building this suspense and mystery, Cukor does a fantastic job in giving the film just enough depth and time to reach a great climactic moment without beating around the bush for too long and causing the film to drag on endlessly. This is a succinct work that builds suspense and then gives a great pay-off without overstaying its welcome.

Technically, the film’s atmosphere often gives a very strong horror movie vibe. Starting off with a shot of Robert’s car careening through the gap in the bridge, the film includes heavy lightning in a storm during the middle of the night to set the scene. It feels quite ominous and frightening due to these sound effects, as well as the score from Bronislaw Kaper. Throughout the film, Kaper’s creepy score serves as the perfect undercurrent for the mystery that Cukor and Stewart seek to create throughout the film’s first two acts. However, what makes it all the more impactful is the cinematography from William H. Daniels. Often draping characters in full darkness - such as Steven when he first meets Christine and hides in the shadows of the room - or in absolute brightness - such as Christine’s eyes as she reveals the dark secrets about Robert - Daniels’ cinematography gives the film a great gothic and horror movie feeling. This matches the score, atmosphere, and general aesthetic perfectly, as Daniels’ reliance upon creepy shadows, low-angle shots of houses on big hills, lightning, and cramped spaces, creating a deeply sinister feeling that mirror the mystery and confusion that is unfolding in the script.

Keeper of the Flame has finally found its year. 2017 is the year for Keeper of the Flame and it should be required viewing for everybody given the rise of fascism, pushing of hatred and division, and the apathetic and under-educated populace that eats it all up with two spoons. It is a film that packs a punch with a powerful warning about this fascism wrapped in an American flag and sold as being patriotic, but it is one we ignored. At the time, those in power realized its power - whether it be the head of MGM or the Republicans in congress - so much so that they yelled and screamed about how dangerous the film was, how it was biased, and how it attacked them and their values without Keeper of the Flame even having to name the charismatic Robert Forrest as a Republican. Instead, he is just a wealthy man who everybody loves. It is those in power and the Republicans who assumed Keeper of the Flame was leftist for showing this man turn into a fascist and power hungry individual. Tragically, this may say everything it needs to about the world we have today. While Keeper of the Flame was so ahead of its time it was labeled as lunacy in 1943, it is tragically right at home in 2017 with its message ignored and the reality it presented having come into full view.