#on the basis of a precedent where they also didn't Just Not

[whetstonefires]

Thinking endlessly about how the classical Athenians were like, so, on the one hand, many administrative tasks on which our civic apparatus relies require expertise.

But on the other hand, if we appoint leaders to necessary positions on the basis that they're the ones who are best suited to that work due to knowing all about it, that's putting real power in their hands, for an extended period instead of a safe little increment, which sets up our nice democracy of Every Free Adult Native Male Who Can Afford Armor to collapse very quickly into a narrow oligarchy.

But the fact remains that administration actually is skilled labor, especially on the tens-of-thousands-of-people scale they were dealing with, and also involves situations where it's impractical to run every step of a process through a committee. Not that they really wanted to acknowledge this but they were stuck with it a bit. If nothing else, people have day jobs, they can't always be voting.

But fulltime governators for whom this is their day job have too much power.

And the way they solved this was, most of the institutional memory and expertise and even exercise of force in the name of civic order was invested in slaves.

Mint workers? Executive accountancy clerks? Cops? All state property.

Very Important Job of distinguishing counterfeit coinage: public slave. Fifty lashes if he shirked or fucked up or cheated. Considerable authority in the context of the job. Could live quite a comfortable life. Absolutely no chance of his using this role as a springboard for building a political base and usurping authority, because he didn't have legal status.

This freed the actual executive positions up to be filled by people given one-year terms by lottery who had the authority to make (routine) calls but no personal power associated with the office; they didn't have to know shit to do the job and this kept them interchangeable.

Except generals, apparently. The Athenians were like, okay generals really do have to know what the fuck they're doing or we'll all die, but we can't make military service the defining feature of citizenship, and then put ourselves under the command of a non-citizen.

(Not even because like they couldn't entrust a slave with so much power, although being under threat of a lashing if people don't like your decisions probably isn't great for making strong strategic and tactical calls; it's the cognitive dissonance.)

So they had ten elected generalships, with less term limitation, and it was in fact a good avenue by which to build a political career.

But like, what the fuck huh?

[neonscandal]

"Are you the strongest because you are gojo satoru or are you gojo saturo because you are the strongest?" I never understood why geto said that to gojo, can you explain to me? Did he want to give gojo a reality check?

Obviously, just my opinion, but I think this was a really subtle way for Geto to burn the bridge between he and Gojo.

Part of what made them equals and, I think, what really endeared Geto to Gojo was the idea that they understood one another. Geto, an outsider, probably didn't know Gojo for the reputation and prestige that typically preceded him. As a normal person with a general sense of compassion, he probably never conflated Gojo with his Limitless or his Six Eyes technique. It's why we see Geto concerned that Gojo is wearing himself down in Okinawa. It's why we see Geto thank Gojo for his hard work in protecting the Star Plasma Vessel. It's why we see Geto immediately spring into action when Toji gets the jump on Gojo.

Geto is aware that even the strongest have weaknesses. Where Gojo is seen as an infallible solution to whatever the elders can't handle, Geto recognizes that even Gojo has limits.

I do think that, within the events of what inspired Geto's defection, that Geto grew bitter or resentful toward Gojo's power, in a sense. Even if he could hide his spiral, it's kind of crazy to think that Gojo with his infinite wisdom couldn't see that he was falling apart but I think we're also over assuming how much time they had together when they were sent on more and more solo missions to deal with the aggressive spawn of curses following Gojo's latent power up. Even so, the basis of their intimacy was a reciprocal understanding of one another, their shared burden in being the strongest. But Geto was struggling and Gojo wasn't there. Gojo became the strongest and Geto realized that, with the limits of his own strength, he'd never be able to meaningfully manifest change in the broken system that would allow the casualties he'd suffered.

In the scene where Geto cuts ties with Jujutsu High and, by extension Gojo, Gojo asked him to explain himself. For one, Geto had been his moral compass for so long and he couldn't reconcile this break in character. But, on a lesser note, I also think that Gojo, at any point in time, would have forgiven and accepted Geto. After all, Gojo had the strength to forge a world where Geto's transgressions could be forgiven. But when Gojo points out that Geto should not pursue something so fruitless, so impossible, Geto acknowledges that it wouldn't seem so impossible if the roles were reversed. The question challenges the notion that Geto could always see Satoru beyond his power. In that moment, he seems to abdicate his place as The Strongest, as someone who understands Satoru in favor of being just like everyone else, effectively shutting a door between them which I believe was the point.

We realize several times over that even those words, as said in anger and/or malice, never changed the way that Gojo saw Geto. But in Geto's mind, that was it, likely as intended.

[matan4il]

Thank you for your daily updates.

I've been seeing people discussing why/not the ICJ case is valid, but nothing on how the judges are likely to rule, a discussion that happens often when there is a big SCOTUS case.

What of their temperaments? Sure there's a Lebanese judge, that doesn't inherently make him antisemitic. Do you know if the judges are more "left" or "right?" My hopes are not high, considering they refuse to see evidence of the actual Oct 7 massacres (shame, since Hamas really wanted that broadcasted).

Hi Nonnie,

I usually try to reply to asks at the same order I got them, but I'll make an exception, because of how relevant this is to the current proceedings at the ICJ right now.

I don't think that being Muslim makes anyone inherently biased, nor do I think being Jewish means a person is free of the antisemitism of their environment, so I generally believe it's impossible for judges to be completely disconnected from what their country's position is. I believe the ICJ recognizes this as well, and that's why, a country that is suing or sued at the ICJ without having a representation among the permanent judges, has the right to appoint one. Specifically when it comes to Lebanon, I have to admit that IDK how possible it is for the Lebanese judge to ignore the fact that his country has for decades implemented an actual apartheid, a legally imposed policy of discrimination against Palestinians who live there.

Well, for this trial, we have an Israeli judge, a SA judge, and the 15 permanent judges. Here's one analysis about the 15 that I read:

American judge: had worked as a legal advisor to the administrations of Clinton and Obama, believes the scope of international law is limited (so she's less likely to grant SA a provisional measure that's a legal precedent).

Russian judge: advises Russia on two legal matters (regarding Georgia, and Kosovo), believes the scope of international law should be wider, has voted against demanding of Russia to stop the military operation in Ukraine, and has published independently his opinion that the ICJ has no right to judge the Russia-Ukraine conflict, because Russia didn't recognize its authority on this. Has visited Israel in 2015 for an international space conference, and together with 2 other ICJ judges, has conducted a "trial" regarding space law.

Slovak judge: sees the scope of international law as narrower, in the past he indicated that he thinks the crime of committing a genocide can't be decided in this court (that it should be in a criminal one), he has also said that quotes uttered in "the heat of battle" (the kind at the basis of SA's lawsuit) are not indicative of policy intent, they're just war propaganda. Has visited Israel in 2015 for an international space conference, and together with 2 other ICJ judges, has conducted a "trial" regarding space law.

French judge: Jewish, considered critical of Israel. In the past, while arguing against Israel, he has also said that the conflict here is political by nature and that the involvement of the ICJ in it is unhelpful to dialogue between the parties.

Moroccan judge: in the past, his decisions included non-legal considerations (for example, he said he's not sure Ukraine's move against Russia fits the convention on the prevention of genocide, but he still was in favor of granting Ukraine the provisional measures it was asking for). He was also a minority vote in the matter of whether the Serbs committed a genocide against the Bosnian Muslims, where the majority determined that the conditions to define it as such were not met.

Somali judge: there are no past indications of how he might rule from an international law perspective. He's Muslim, but in the past he has joined an Iftar dinner at the home of the Israeli ambassador at the Hague, and has also once opened a Holocaust Day lecture for the ICJ.

Chinese judge: has worked for her government in the past. She has voted against the provisional measures Ukraine has asked for against Russia, saying that it seems like an attempt to use the convention in order to get the ICJ to decide in broader political matters than the convention allows for. She has also argued against provisional measures that only demand one side would stop the fighting.

Ugandan judge: has worked for her government in the past. There are no past indications of how she might rule from an international law perspective.

Indian judge: tends towards an expanded view of what is discrimination. Has visited Israel in 2015 for an international space conference, and together with 2 other ICJ judges, has conducted a "trial" regarding space law.

Jamaican judge: has worked for his government in the past. Has voted against Russia when it came to the provisional measures demanding it stops its fighting against Ukraine.

Lebanese judge: has expressed anti-Israel views in the past, and has also repeatedly shown that he takes his country's position into account in his decisions. Has argued in the past that in situations of military occupation, the burden of proof is very low, or that the burden of proof should be on the occupier.

German judge: in the past, he has published his opposition to an Israeli law professor's article, arguing that a wider view is required when it comes to the right to self defense.

Japanese judge: in the past, he has published an article that sees the right of third party countries to appear before the ICJ (as is SA in this case) as limited.

Australian judge: very active in the field of women and gender rights. In the past, she has criticized ICJ rulings that allowed the coalition forces a lot of freedom in Iraq.

Brazilian judge: in the past, he has referred to the PLO as a terrorist organization (at the time about which he was writing), but he did the same regarding the Jewish underground movement, the Hagana (which worked to protect Jews, and to smuggle them "illegally" into the Land of Israel to save them from the Nazis during WWII).

According to one legal correspondent that I listened to, SA has asked for so many provisional measures, that the ICJ is unlikely to turn them all down. This reporter believes that the ICJ will likely not grant the provisional measure calling on Israel to stop the fighting, but it will probably grant at least two other provisional measures. She had a bet which two, the provisional measure calling on more humanitarian aid to be brought into Gaza (if true, this would be so redundant. One of the points made at the ICJ proceedings, was that Israel has agreed to allow in as much humanitarian aid as could be taken in on the Gazan side, and was willing to expand its operations on the Israeli side for this to happen. In other words, what's currently limiting the amount of aid going in is the capacity to handle it on the Gazan, not Israeli, side), and to collect evidence regarding the fighting in Gaza (which Israel is already doing).

I hope this helped! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[destinysbounty]

Not sure if this counts, but how do you explain the ninjas ages? How are they teachers but also like 16? I always love hearing people's thoughts on this

For a while now I've been entertaining a headcanon that I think would perfectly explain this in a way that makes sense. Note that this is just a circumstantial theory with no explicit basis in canon, so feel free to take it or leave it as you see fit.

Okay, so. To understand the teacher situation (as well as my theories for why Ninjago's education system is fucked to hell and back), we first have to talk about the Serpentine War for a sec. Bare with me, I promise this will make sense.

This seems like a no-brainer, but a war requires people to actually, yknow, fight in it. Which means large demographics of people have to leave their homes, families, jobs, and communities. Naturally, this forces the ones they've left behind to compensate for the economic deficit caused by their absence. Anyone familiar with American history could tell you that this happened to the US during WWII - as swathes of men shipped off overseas to fight in the war, women back home had to take charge of the economy and participate more actively in the workforce.

I think it goes without saying that this kind of situation probably happened to Ninjago during the Serpentine War. But the thing is, we know women fought in the war stood at the front lines alongside the men - we've seen them. So if that's the case, then who stepped up to help run the economy while Mommy and Daddy were away?

I think you can guess where I'm going with this.

That's right. With so many people leaving to fight in the War (and also dying from Serpentine raids), I don't think it's unreasonable to conclude that some subset of kids and teens had to step up to the plate and take up some of the vacancies their parents had left behind. Obviously I'm not saying all the adults were gone, but it was enough to warrant kids entering the workforce prematurely.

And of course, if kids are getting jobs at younger ages, then I think it's valid to extrapolate that to teacher positions as well.

As you can imagine, this shift created a few new social precedents: 1) expectations for kids, especially teens, to get jobs and become mature at younger ages was normalized; and 2) requirements for certain careers, including education, became much more lenient.

This labor expectation imposed on older kids and teens would actually explain a lot more than just the s3 teacher situation, when you think about it.

Not only are unqualified teens allowed to become teachers, but also undead skeleton warriors from the Underworld (see s1ep4). I'm sorry, but you can't convince me that Kruncha and Nuckal are licensed educators.

The existence of Darkley's, and how it was able to exist for so long without any kind of administrative intervention. The education system is in shambles, and it's because Ninjago's infrastructure never fully recovered from the Serpentine War.

Disparities and gaps in people's historical/world knowledge. No one knows shit about anything. Because again, the education system in in shambles. (If you doubt the validity of this point, let me just remind you I'm from the US. I once met a college student who didn't know what 'north' was.)

The existence of the Paper Boys - how they can devote what seem to be entire workdays to an extremely dangerous job, with minimal adult oversight (if any).

The entirety of Ninjago society seems totally chill with the fact that their saviors are a bunch of kids. To them this isn't cause for concern or even distrust in the ninjas' capability, it's just the norm!

In s15, Lloyd was able to get a job, presumably without a high school diploma or GED of some kind. Or, yknow, any formal education past grade 3 (although we know from supplemental material that he did get some kind of tutoring from the ninja, so this point is debatable).

If some kind of in-universe CPS equivalent exists, then they certainly don't do anything. No one has ever reported or raised issue with Lloyd being homeless, Cole also being homeless for a while, the ninja not being in school, Kai and Nya being parent-free since the ages of ~6 and 3 respectively, and other such things that would ordinarily be cause for alarm.

While there is canon evidence that Kai and Nya received some degree of aid from their community, especially when they were younger, this seems to be completely absent by the time the series begins. Perhaps the community's assistance began to withdraw over time as the siblings faced increasing expectations to become self-sufficient despite still being children. Like, "you're 10 years old now, Kai, it's time for you to start pulling your weight and taking care of the shop by yourself. You need to grow up."

If we approach Ninjago's worldbuilding from this context, suddenly the teacher arc becomes less of a plothole and more...depressing, tbh.

And in a weird way, this interpretation actually fits in nicely with Ninjago's themes of generational trauma. Think about it. Society was damaged by the Serpentine War. And because they never really healed from what happened, the kids of future generations continue to face the normalization of their childhoods gradually being ripped away from them before they're ready. Kinda like kids in a broken home taking on adult responsibilities to cover the slack. Kinda like Cole handling house chores while his father grieved away from home. Kina like Kai and Nya running the shop while their parents were gone.

And everyone is just...used to it. The only times in all 15 seasons that anyone stakes a complaint about this system are in seasons 1-2 when Lloyd was a little child, in season 8 when Harumi was ridiculing the ninja, and in season 15 when Wu refused to lead the Paper Boys into battle.

(I do think it's worth noting that young children are still regarded as kids, of course, as seen with how the ninja were treated when they got de-aged. But this isn't really a refutation of my argument, as much as it is a clue to help us identify society's cutoff for childhood innocence.)

Again, it's more of a circumstantial theory than anything based in fact. So you're free to dispute it as you like. But you have to admit it would explain a lot, wouldn't it?

Anyway, that was...a lot longer than I was expecting it to be. Damn. I'm beginning to think that's gonna be a running theme with these theory posts.

Thanks for the ask! <3

[sukibenders]

TBOSAS movie is proving time and time again that as long the character is a handsome white man, he can get away with anything or be babified of any wrongdoing. Like the number of people that I've seen go out of their way to try and justify Snow's actions, not even just young Snow anymore at this point but he's largely where this happens, using the term "he was just misunderstood" and acting as if his trauma was an excuse is mind-blowing. Did he go through traumatic stuff? Yes, but acting as if that excuses many of his actions, specifically for young Snow because there's no way in hell that mindset will work even a fraction with his older self (but people still try), is false and a mindset that needs to be stopped. Like I can't help but think about the way he views the people of the districts already in TBOSAS, seeing them and anything about them as animals rather than people, and how that mindset even falls on to the Covey and Lucy Gray herself. When reading some of their scenes together he comes off so passive aggressive when she talks about her plight, but it's largely because he treats her like an object---no, a PRIZE to be won and owned (thinking back to how, before they were even together romantically and where she didn't owe him shit, he still saw her as "his girl" and would get obsessive over the fact that others gravitated to her in a way he didn't like).

I'm not saying that it's wrong to find the bad guy attractive, it's not and Snow is very handsome, I will admit that. But just because he got a face card doesn't mean that should be basis for justifying every horrendous act he's done. And also, he's eighteen years old, why are people acting like he doesn't know his right from his left? He knows exactly what he's doing, from the books where his thoughts are literally laid out for us, to the movie itself. Though not as clear cut sometimes as the books, there are plenty scenes that let you know who he is (I think back to that classroom scene where Gaul is asking them questions, and Sejanus rightfully calls them out on their bs, but Snow uses his outrage and turns it into a way to make the Games better, completely going against Sejanus' original point).

What's even more sinister is some in the fandom going as far as to blame Lucy Gray for all of Snow's problems by saying "oh, but if she had just heard him out then maybe he wouldn't have been so heartbroken", as if she should had further risked her life and wellbeing to adhere to this man's needs when he was out to harm her or the fact that him having his heartbroken is justification for everything else he did before and after. There are many other examples of this, but it set a precedent for a very glaring problem in fandom spaces where the female character, especially if they are woc, is always to blame for the male, usually white, character's bad actions and that if they just listened to them and heard them out then so on and so on. Reminds me very much of the treatment of Alina in both show and books fandom spaces and babifying of the Darkling's actions by putting all the blame on her (never mind the fact that he's the cause for so much of her trauma, he's pretty after all *this was sarcasm*).

It's been a minute since I've seen the movie, so my example may be a little fuzzy, but my point still stands. You can like these characters and find them attractive, that's fine and normal. But where problems arise is when you try to paint over their bad acts because you thirst after them and/or proceed to place blame on the female characters, especially if they are woc, as a scapegoat.

[abidethetempest]

Eliksni Conlang Progress

Velask! this is my first progress post, hopefully the first of many! i have been really waffling on whether or not i wanted to even share any early content yet, but then i realized that was really just me being scared to show off my art and i'm not about that shit (plus i want to have a record of my progress to look back on)!!! so i'm gonna show off my art >:DDDD

so here's most of what i have now! beware, very long post below the cut:

Phonology

i hope to god tumblr didn't totally cronch that image. so yeah this is the rough phonology, emphasis on rough. full disclosure, everything i know about the IPA i learned for this project like a week ago. i'm a total noob, and i'm sure an experienced conlanger or linguist would look at this and their soul would exit their body in horror or smth equally dramatic. but in my defense, i did have to work backwards to build this based on existing material instead of making it all myself, so it was a lot more restrictive and difficult.

Short Vowels

ɪ: i

e: e

æ: a

ə: e or a (always unstressed)

ʊ: u

ɑ: aa

Long Vowels

i: ii

ɔ: o (primarily used before r)

Diphthongs:

eɪ: written as “ey” or “eh”

eə, written as “eyr” (pretty much exclusively seen paired with r, which is the reason for that spelling)

aɪ, written as “ei”

oʊ, written as “oh”

these diphthongs are used to represent a number of sounds that canonical sources do not differentiate between in writing. There might have been a way to do this using rules for pronounciation instead, but it was honestly so frustrating to think i had nailed down a good rule only to find one or two exceptions that i just decided to chuck canon out the window and make some damn diphthongs.

(if you don't know/understand the IPA, I highly recommend checking out this video for a great overview)

Phonotactics

this is also a very rough draft version, doubly so since the only person who has to care abt writing/speaking Eliksni rn is me. but this is my current basis for how i make, pronounce, and write words. i will definitely clean this up if/when i start making guides on using Eliksni, but it makes do for now.

C^3VC^3

Onset: all phonemes

Nucleus: all vowels/diphthongs

Coda: all consonants including clusters

stress on first syllable in most two syllable words

in three syllable words, stress on second syllable if it contains a k or a long vowel/diphthong

stress never on prefix

single "i" is short if surrounded by other letters and long if left open on either side. "ii" is always long and is written that way in words where it is surrounded by letters. Words that start with single i will be spelled with ii if they are compounded with another word. ex) ikrim (time), draiikrim (forever, lit. “all time”)

Consonant Cluster Rules

I only have rules for clusters of two so far, but I am going to flesh out the rules for three-consonant clusters soon since a few of those have cropped up in my lexicon building exercises. The chart for these is in an earlier post if you want to see it all color-coded and whatnot

C: can only pair with H to for CH, all romanizations using C in place of K are done so for aesthetic purposes (i only preserved the use of C as an occassional K because I like how it looks in romanizations, the actual Eliksni alphabet will never substitute C for K)

H: can only precede another consonant as part of the vowel in the nucleus, except for Y (functionally, H being attached to a vowel makes it part of that vowel, but i wanted to highlight this feature to make it very clear that H cannot precede another consonant on its own)

J: never pairs with another consonant. (i wasnt even going to include J as a sound in Eliksni, but there had to be two (2) damn canon names w J in them so i felt a little obligated)

Y: functioning as a consonant, Y cannot pair with any other consonant.

Z: never pairs with another consonant at beginning

Making this bigass chart was unironically so fun. i love you spreadsheets <3 i love you color coding <3 no i am not neurotypical why do you ask

Syntax

VSO 

verb-adverb

adposition-noun

possessor-possessee

Noun-adjective

thats it lmao! i'm not even sure if this is gonna stay the same, the only sentences i've written so far have been very basic and all like 3 words long. this is definitely an aspect i am expecting to change a lot over time as I refine how i want things to flow.

Stop! Grammar Time!

(i've waited three years to make that dumb joke lol sorry)

unfortunately grammar itself is no joke.

these are the affixes for conjugating verbs in Eliksni. There are 3 tenses currently (if anyone saw that post I made a few days ago abt the second past tense, i do still plan to implement it, just haven't had the time to think of affixes for it or decide how i really want it to work)

For the sake of time and bc this post is,,,, really damn long already, I won't be including the example conjugations i did here. might make a separate post with that so i can also show off how the mood markers work.

speaking of...

Mood time! i will readily admit this shit kinda confuses the heck outta me, though i understand the basics at least in theory. Some are more intuitive for me, like the imperative and interrogative. i might even drop the subjunctive, although i do want to at least try to grasp it first. Also shout out to the imperative for being irregular bc of ✨worldbuilding reasons✨, we love to see it.

and FINALLY

Noun case markers! Something my time learning German actually prepared me for!

There are only two cases in Eliksni, nominative and accusative. All other situations where other cases like dative or genitive would be used will be done periphrastically using prepositions and such. I was inspired by the lack of gendered third-person-pronoun in Mando'a, which is why there is one pronoun to refer to someone in the third person regardless of gender. If gender absolutely need be specificed, an adjective corresponding to their gender (ie: masculine, feminine, nonbinary, etc) is used.

and that's what i've got after about a week's worth of progress! for the sake of good recordkeeping, the date at the time of writing this post is 7-12-23.

feel free leave any thoughts (but please be gentle! i'm very new to this)!

[picnokinesis]

hello taka,

I respect you very highly as a cherished mutual of mine. I’m on anon because I can’t trust people not to misconstrue me and paint me as something I’m not. I just want to express concern over your reblog of South Africa—people conflate the situation with them and with Israel in dangerous ways. the key difference is that the Hamas-run government’s mission is to kill all Jews and Israelis. This includes the Muslims and Christians living in Israel. They are not synonymous situations, because there has never been a precedent for what’s happening now. it is naive to think that there would be no risk to the Israeli citizens, because there is a genuine threat to all of their lives. I just wanted to share this with you because it is very painful to see misinformation like this being spread, and how it misrepresents the situation. You don’t have to respond to this; I am sympathetic to why you shared it. I am only sending this ask because I see that you care and I don’t want you to be misled.

Hi there!!

I actually really appreciate this ask, because it made me go and have a conversation with a good friend of mine who studies international conflict and relations, and has a much greater understanding of this sort of thing than I do. Which is gonna be the basis of my response here, but I just wanna clarify that I'm by no means an expert on any of this, or how this sort of situation can be resolved.

I think I get where you're coming from here! And actually, I fundamentally agree with you on a lot of things - you're right, there is a tendency right now for people to draw parallels between these other historical/current situations, which can lead to over-generalisation which isn't really helpful, as some things are a lot more complicated and less clear cut than others. And, also, every situation is unique. You're right - the solution to apartheid in South Africa, and the situation in Boliva are not the same as what's happening with Israel and Palestine. So saying these situations are exactly the same isn't helpful.

However - I do think you missed the point of that post. Or, at least, the point how I interpreted it. For example, I don't think that post was at all calling for a Hamas-led government - in fact, I don't think it mentioned Hamas at all? My initial reaction to your ask, I'll admit, was frustration, because it seems that every time people try and talk about what's happening in Gaza, people bring up Hamas, and whilst I know why, it comes back to the whole thing of like, if you're spending so much time explaining that, no, you don't agree with Hamas and you think the Oct 7th attack was wrong, then you are not talking about the bigger problem, which is that nothing that Hamas did could ever justify what the Israeli government is doing right now, or has been doing since 1948. I know that's not at all what you were saying, but it is really frustrating. I think you're right, I don't think there should be a Hamas-led government (thought, to be frank, it's not really my place to say who should or shouldn't be in charge). I don't know what the government of a free Palestine (presumably combined with Israel) would look like - and I know that building a democracy is very difficult and also dangerous. But we have to hope that it's possible to achieve something that would actually work, right? We have to believe that there can be a future where Israelis and Palestinians can live together, equally, and without fear, and without prejudice, for either side (and I personally think the risk is much greater for Palestinians not being treated equally, but at the same time I recognise what you are saying too). The fact is that historically, a multicultural Israel/Palestine has existed (albeit, Israel as the country state that we know it today didn't necessarily, but you get what I mean) - and so I think that post is a lot less about 'these situations are all the same and should be treated the exact same way, with the same solutions'. If it is about that, then I don't think it's correct. I think it's a lot more about solidarity, and the idea there have been all sorts of awful situations before, and that afterwards, when varying solutions were achieved, people were able to live side by side with each other. That it is possible.

That said though, I definitely didn't have all these thoughts in mind when reblogging that post - I just thought yeah I really agree with this! and reblogged it. So, I'll be honest, I didn't know or understand all of what you said here - so I'm really glad that it prompted me to go and talk to my friend and start looking more into things and learning more, which is never a bad thing. Because you're right, this is complicated. And it isn't black and white.

There isn't an easy solution to what's going on. And I'm not here to provide that solution anyway. But - I guess I come at this from a Disaster Management perspective, which makes sense since I studied that. And in Disaster Management, there's a thing very imaginatively named 'the Disaster Management Cycle', and basically it goes from prevention, preparation and mitigation > DISASTER > response, recovery, development, building back to a new normal where things are better, and cycle back into that initial prevention for future disasters. And so, when I'm thinking of response, I'm also thinking of what needs to come next - what comes after the ceasefire? What comes after the aid, the immediate relief? We've got to think about recovery and development, and what that new normal would look like. And I think, whilst I now see that making comparison the way that post did can cause harm in it's own way, I think that the core of it was that we want to work for a future in Palestine and Israel where there is no displacement of anyone, where people can return and have freedom of movement, where people are equal. And, sure, that isn't going to happen tomorrow, and it's not going to happen next week - because it takes time and it's extremely difficult. And I probably am naive - but we have to have hope, right? We've got to have something to aim for. We (or, rather, someone) has got to be able to sit down and say this is what we want a free Palestine to actually look like, and there will be things that are practical and things that will be idealistic, and things that will be a bit of both, but regardless...we gotta start somewhere.

And, of course, the worst part of this whole situation is that we're not there yet. We're not even in response. We're still in the disaster stage. And I think that is what we've got to be talking about the most at the moment because the situation is getting worse and worse, and I can go on about long term solutions all I like, but there are things that need to be done right now. And, unfortunately, neither you nor I have the power to snap our fingers and do that - but we do have the power to be as annoying as possible to the people who do. So, my friend - I have no idea which country you're in, but if you're in the UK or the USA or any country that's failed to back a ceasefire or has cut funding to UNRWA, and you haven't been annoying to your local official/rep/mp about it yet - give them hell. And then, when we're in the recovery stage, we can start talking about who should be in charge and making sure no one else ever gets killed or loses everything over all of this.

[lemonhemlock]

https://twitter.com/Targ_Nation/status/1611158240359759872?t=bfo77HLITj21KBLCUKx6fA&s=19

Seeing all those likes took years off my life

i don't even know where to begin............

"centrist bs" - the concept of left and right doesn't exist in a medieval setting ...................

where was this energy when cersei was committing abuses left and right and placing her bastard children on the throne? why didn't "the modern audience" "almost unanimously stand by the side of the woman being usurped of her throne" back then? 😵

but this isn't even about one side being more wrong than the other or both sides being awful or war being horrible as a rule or the smallfolk always paying with their lives and livelihoods when the high lords play their game of thrones

that entire tweet is predicated on not grasping the basic principles of the polity they are operating within 😫 you cannot define usurpation based on absolute primogeniture when that society relies on male primogeniture for inheritance, in that context it literally means the opposite

words don't somehow gain whatever meaning you want based on what you think is fair, same how laws don't materialize into existence just because you say so. any kind of law is a social construct, doesn't exist outside the confines of society and requires a certain kind of framework in order to be accepted & enforced. if proposed laws are not accepted by the majority and cannot be enforced, they only exist on the astral plane

there aren't even any proper institutions in westeros. literally the only ones i can identify are the crown and the small council, which serves as a kind of proto-government. there's no parliament, there's no proper justice system, no magna charta. the only courts that seem to operate are Faith-based courts and your liege lord's judgment. medieval-style legal systems and law enforcement are headache-inducing as a rule anyway, but feudal monarchies generally involve constant negotiations and power leverages between kings and their vassals

a more apt characterization of the Dance would be what exactly and how much can the targaryens get away with now that they've decided to impose themselves as rulers of a unified westeros. so far, they had to accept the religion of the land (aegon the conqueror was anointed by the high septon) and were forced to renounce polygamy. they got to keep practicing incest as a result of jaehaerys' successful doctrine of exceptionalism. see? negotiation. now the question remains - are they going to respect succession laws like a normal person (i.e. Andal Law) or are they going to resort to this ridiculous circus every time a targaryen monarch dies? because at the point of the dance, there had hardly been a straightforward transition of power since the conquest

for the internal coherence of this fictional world to be maintained, the nobles should be pushing Andal inheritance rights like crazy, because their own succession is decided on the basis of that and they would be directly interested in not fucking it up for themselves or their descendants by having weird precedents set by the royal family. a lot of these lords, if not most, have bastard siblings/children of their own, as well as elder sisters/daughters. it doesn't make sense for them to threaten their own stability for the sake of rhaenyra of all people, who isn't even good at her job and has done absolutely nothing to endear herself to them. what could they possibly gain by supporting her?

the question of the monarch imposing a law is much more believable in a centralized state, which westeros most definitely is not. imposing laws can also be done via force, of course, as long as """the state""" retains the monopoly on violence. the targaryens' v effective military superiority has so far been conferred by dragons. but rhaenyra's side isn't the only one that has dragons anymore. the opposing faction, i.e. the side who'd perpetuate Andal law, also has them now, as it happens. ergo war.

this situation is absolutely not similar in any way to today's democracies where laws are voted by parliament and the rest of the country have no choice but to abide by them or else the police come knocking on your door and hand you over to the our modern justice system, where your punishment is set by objective specialists & not decided by crazy stunts like trial by ordeal or the whims of your liege lord

tldr: there is no incentive for westerosi nobility to break andal succession law for rhaenyra, since it would be legal self-sabotage by setting a precedent that could come to bite those very same people in the a*se. rhaenyra is NOT an only child - by having trueborn brothers, the only way she can ascend is by breaking the laws & customs of the land. ergo disgruntled lords will inevitably flock to alicent's sons to form covert alliances & subversive power centres that, in time, will erupt in open rebellions. real-world historical examples attest to this happening with or without the consent of their respective figureheads (eg. lady jane grey) - i.e. it doesn't matter if aegon/aemond/daeron play happy families or not. in turn, the only way rhaenyra can prevent this is by executing her brothers/their male descendants. the greens don't want to die => the only way of achieving security for them is by claiming the throne.

alternatively, rhaenyra's life is not in danger as long as she bends the knee, as no-one in-universe would take her claim seriously with 3 living brothers. rhaenys also bent the knee to viserys after losing an election and is still alive. i'll say it again: it is not in the lords' best interest to support rhaenyra in the first place. if we are to go by any logic - what would they gain, should they flock to her? they would destabilize the line of succession for themselves for a (pretty terrible) queen, a reviled king consort and a bastard heir. but, as far as advantages and favours are concerned, what would they be, specifically? in order to outweigh the above-mentioned disadvantages?

you should all blame viserys for getting remarried and fathering sons, because had rhaenyra remained an only child or had only sisters, none of this would be happening & she would have become the first ruling queen of westeros

[gaykarstaagforever]

Yeah fanfiction is "new".

That is why nearly every stage play and movie version of Dracula that has come out since 1897 is writers making new romantic pairings of the main characters, gender-swapping them, combining them, changing the spellings of names, and making minor characters into main characters on the basis of who in the cast the director was having sex with.

"YEAH BUT THAT WAS MOSTLY TO AVOID COPYRIGHT LAWSUITS BY BRAM STOKER'S WIDOW!"

Yes it often was. Another very modern problem creatives often face.

(If you didn't know, Nosferatu 1922 featured 'Count Orlok' exclusively because of this. And he may have only been an ugly 'nosferatu' also to avoid her rabid patent-trolling. That woman would have claimed a copyright on vampires themselves, except everyone could prove that that monster had been popular in the West for a least a generation before Stoker wrote his novel.)

Imagine being in a situation where you can use A monster, but not THE version of that monster everyone is familiar with. Another modern problem.

See also Universal owning the iconic Bela Lugosi Dracula now. So while the former Mrs. Stoker is long-gone, you're still going to have to be careful if you make a now-public domain character look too much like he did in a boring movie from 1931.

To be fair, Universal seems to ignore most of their opportunities to sue. ...Unless you make some good money "stealing" their complicated aesthetic IP. Then, prepare to get Nintendo'd.

Also, fun fact, the words "vampire" and "nosferatu" are both garbled English versions of foreign words that mean something completely different. "Vampir" is an old Hungarian or Slavic word for either witch or ghost or ghost-witch, and is itself probably a corruption of a Turkish word roughly equivalent to 'pagan,' specifically someone who does animal sacrifices to a non-Abrahamic god. 'Nosferatu' might be a corruption of a Romanian word for "a bad thing," and comes from exactly one English tourist to Romania who said it meant vampire back in 1885.

My point is, Bram Stoker himself was writing fanfiction based on other vampire-based works that preceded his own, and it is only fair that everyone has been writing fan fiction based on his for more than 100 years now.

And people who didn't create any of this have been claiming various copyrights on parts of it for just as long.

Also Dracula was a real historic person no one can copyright in the first place. But he was this super-boring Romanian who just tortured 40,000 Turks to death, that no one in the West cared about until a Victorian named a scary exotic sex-ghoul after him.

...And people think the success of Fifty Shades of Grey was the first time someone made bank writing horny vampire fantiction.

[thefirstknife]

Is stuff like clarity control and ahsa widely known within the destiny universe? Or is it classified? Like does your average run of the mill vanguard operative know about what’s going on on Titan, Does that Exo that work at the bar in town know about clarity

Is it on a need to know Basis where vanguard operatives know but civilians don’t ?

Not only asking about those two things necessarily but things of a similar kind too. Things like the seraph satellites and their destruction, the stuff that’s happens in the throne world or even Saladin now being a part of caiatls war council as well

These things are fairly well known, at least to Guardians! I'm not entirely sure it actual civilians in the City know everything, though they must know at least some stuff given that it frequently impacts their lives and Guardians also tend to chat a lot. There's probably some stuff that doesn't really reach the civilians, but I believe most of it does one way or another, mostly through Guardians.

Usually how it's treated is that a select few people find out first, which technically just means the Vanguard and the Young Wolf and some other people like for example Osiris or Drifter or whoever is involved in the story. New missions, raids and dungeons are first uncovered and cleared by the YW and a few other guardians (since raids in particular need 6 total people).

But after that, all of these missions become open to others and every time we clear them, it's canonical in some way. Some more so than others; for example us killing Fikrul over and over in his strike was canon every time. Some other missions might be sort-of canon as in we go back into these areas to clear out ads, but we don't really kill the same boss over and over. But repeated visits are canonical and other Guardians are free to go in and learn and get loot. As soon as you get hundreds of people freely entering these areas, the news would spread pretty fast. The only question is how interested civilians are in some of these things.

A few examples of this:

recently when we discovered Spire of the Watcher dungeon, canonically the YW did it first, but afterwards Ana Bray hired another fireteam to go back in for more data. Our repeated visits are treated more or less the same; as Guardians going in for loot and information.

Stuff we discovered in the Vow of the Disciple is known and Guardians were hired to transfer samples and information out of the Pyramid, detailed here showing a random Guardian transporting samples which didn't end well for him. However, this shows that these things aren't kept a strict secret, as many Guardians are required to secure locations like this, keep enemies out and gather data. Similarly, the Preservation mission is canonically happening over and over which allows Guardians to enter the Pyramid and clear it of Scorn so anyone can go in and snoop around.

Other stuff that might feel like it would be classified, like certain texts, are widely available. Witch Queen Collector's Edition showed us that both Books of Sorrow and Unveiling are being read by pretty much everyone casually. These texts were otherwise unlocked by us in missions, but once they're unlocked, it seems like they become available to everyone else in the setting freely.

Sometimes others actually precede the YW and the Vanguard in some missions, like for example with Garden of Salvation raid. That was first done by a completely different fireteam, including the discovery of the exotic gun from it, Divinity. It's unclear how much of it they did exactly, but they reference the Divinity puzzle and actually get the gun. They were definitely in the space first.

We also know that civilians are also involved with research and science in the world, shown here by listing a few papers written by civilian researchers. This also shows that there's a scientific journals with a lot of volumes and papers being released. So even outside of learning things from Guardians, civilians surely have access to general knowledge and new discoveries in the setting. That doesn't mean that everyone knows everything by default, as it probably depends on someone's personal interests first and foremost, as well as how new or potentially dangerous some information is. For example at this point, stuff about the DSC and new discoveries about Exos are probably fairly spread out, so a random Exo civilians is probably aware of it (if they care enough to read into it). I'm sure some brand new stuff is kept contained for a while so Ahsa was probably a secret until we were sure that she's not a danger to us, but now she may be better known, especially since she fought by our side and is our ally.

[erithel]

So I know you’ve talked about this before but…who on the Voltron staff thought it was a good idea to make Keith the leader, like they really make it seem he just “has to” because it was meant to be or something. But if you look at his actions during the seasons, uh…no. He’s a terrible pick.

I know why the writers did it, because it happened in the original. And I DO think this could have worked and have become a good character arc for him, having to stop all his reckless actions and think of what it meant for the others on the team instead of just the endgame. For a character as reckless and self sacrificing as Keith that’s a good character arc!

It’s just that…well the writers actually forgot to write the whole character arc. From point A to point B

It’s like one of the writers were like “Ok so Keith needs to become a good leader worthy of leading Voltron! How do we do this without putting too much thought and time into it?” And another writer was just like “just send him off to a weird space creature for a big chunk of time, everyone knows isolation in the middle of no where in the literal void of space does great for the human mind.”

I also just don’t understand why Shiro thought Keith would be a good leader, he’s seen all the reckless shit he does and still thinks that’s“leader worthy” material.

haha yes I have talked about this (most likely) several times before, so I won't get into it too much here.

I think they just wrote themselves into a bit of a problem with Keith becoming the leader. I don't know much about the other Voltron shows, but I believe he was the leader in them – or at the very least, in the original 80's Voltron. So of course the plan from the beginning was to eventually have Keith become the leader in VLD.

And I 100% feel that Shiro only said that to put the idea in viewer's heads, because you're absolutely right. There was no real basis for it, and I feel it actually devalues their relationship because it makes it seem as though Shiro didn't know Keith at all.

The issue comes from Keith's actual characterization, and the fact that he would have been much better suited for a different role – his original role in the Red Lion.

In life and in theory, you do want leaders who are able/willing to pitch in. You want leaders who are there with you on the front lines, and who have your back. I mean, I'm sure we've all had managers or superiors in the work place who just hang out in their offices and don't do anything. Nobody wants that.

But you also don't want a leader who feels that they have to do everything by themselves. And that's the kind of person Keith was, especially in the early seasons.

He was the one who would make the sacrifice play instead of trusting someone else to handle things. He was the one who would most likely work himself into pure exhaustion instead of delegating or even dreaming of asking someone else to do something that he felt he could/should handle on his own.

Keith's arc – growing from the reckless kid who only knew how to look out for himself, into a strong, calm leader who trusted his team – would have been, like, a Zuko level arc. But unfortunately stuff like that takes away from the action (siiiiigh), which often seems to take precedent.

[kokorolinkrun]

Somewhat inspired by fanmade Miracle Lights for the Equestria Girls movies I saw on DeviantArt many, many years ago, this is based off an idea I had today: What if, in a parallel universe not too different from this one, the theatrical releases of the Sonic the Hedgehog movies had Miracle Light-esque items to go with them?

A bit of explaination first: Miracle Lights are items used in the Precure Movies used to cheer the on Cures or restore their strength when they're in a pinch. They're given out to young kids in theatres before a movie starts, and said movie is preceded with a small short explaining safety measures regarding them (not to wave them around like crazy, not to shine them directly into your eyes, ect.).

Now that the basics are out of the way, I can explain this idea properly.

In this hypothetical alternate timeline, Sonic 2's Light would be the "Master Emerald Light", named after the Master Emerald - which is also the basis for the "light" part specifically. Just like the Miracle Lights, they're around 7cm-8cm, and have a small hole at the bottom to put a chain through and potentially be worn as a necklace with.

During Sonic 2's theatrical run, there would probably be special screenings for it (normal screenings would be the same as the actual theatrical release, in order to not drive off people who didn't like the Master Emerald Light feature and potentially harm box office sales) where these, similarly to the Miracle Lights, would be given out to the kids in the audience, though some would probably be given to teens and adults too. These specific screenings would be preceded with an animated short focusing on Sonic and Tails explaining the Light and its safety measures, with Knuckles and Robotnik being the ones disobeying them.

As for their use... There'd probably be around three main points they'd be used in: The scene at the start where Sonic is trying to stop the criminals, the scene in the cabin when Sonic and Tails are dancing (the reason they'd be used here is simply just to show support to the two), and the final showdown against Robotnik (ESPECIALLY the moment leading up to Sonic becoming Super Sonic). In order to not ruin the flow of the movie, these scenes simply have a small animation of Sonic waving a Master Emerald Light in the bottom right corner of the screen with text telling the audience it's time to wave their Lights. While most streaming site releases (including the Paramount+ release) remove the animation during these scenes, there's some special DVD/Blu-Ray releases that come with a Master Emerald Light and an option to watch the movie with the animations and pre-movie short intact.

[uncloseted]

I'm really disappointed with the depp v heard verdict. I feel that this is a huge step back for women :(

I agree. Regardless of what actually happened in this situation (and I don't think we'll ever really know what happened, given all the media attention and spin that's been put on it), this outcome is a major blow to female victims of abuse and to the #metoo movement in general. I think this is going to be a verdict that feeds the narrative that women are falsely accusing men of abuse and that pushes more men into misogynistic, far-right politics. And I think it's going to make female victims of popular, powerful, well-resourced men even more afraid to speak up because they know that the playing field is inherently uneven. The Daily Wire reportedly spent tens of thousands of dollars promoting misleading news about the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial on social media- the court of public opinion was intentionally turned against her. And as a result, the amount of absolute vitriol that Amber Heard has faced because she "gives off bad vibes" and "seems insincere" is way beyond anything I've ever seen directed at a male abuser, even ones where the case against them is cut and dry.

Besides which, the basis for this verdict is concerning. Regardless of whether or not you believe that Heard abused Depp, or whether they abused one another, or whether Depp abused her, the three claims she made in that op-ed seem (to me) to be verifiably true:

 “I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”

“Two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.”

“I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”

Like, yeah. She absolutely did speak up about sexual violence, became a public figure known for speaking up about domestic abuse, faced our culture's wrath over it, and saw how powerful abusers are protected by institutions. Even if she's totally lying about the circumstances, those claims are still true- and from the evidence presented in the trial, it's seems obvious to me that Depp was at least abusive in his language, if not in his actions. Plus, in the US, in order to win a defamation case, the person being accused of defamation must 1. know that their statements are false and 2. make the statements with the intention of hurting the person the statements are about. So not only do those claims she made need to be false, but they need to have been made with the express intention of damaging Johnny Depp's life or career.

It's kind of wild to me that Depp was even allowed to use those statements as grounds for a defamation lawsuit in the first place, since they didn't actually name him. It's even more wild that the jury believed that the primary reason she made these statements were to harm Depp, instead of, I don't know... wanting to protect victims of sexual violence and domestic abuse? Or even just wanting to gain a larger spotlight and accelerate her career- to become a "darling of the #metoo movement", as she was accused of by Depp's lawyers? If those statements were explicitly meant to damage Depp's reputation, wouldn't she have at least said his name?

I want to be clear that I don't think Heard is innocent here. I think it's likely that she and Depp had an incredibly toxic and abusive relationship where both of them were at times the aggressor and the victim. But the idea that a powerful, popular male celebrity can win a defamation case over demonstrably true statements that don't even mention him, just because he is more popular and has more resources on his side... that doesn't sit well with me. It's especially troubling to me because Depp already lost a similar defamation suit in the UK, where it's actually easier to win a defamation case than it is in the US. This verdict also sets a bad precedent for the future because it validates the legal strategy of suing for defamation in order to sidestep allegations of assault- Marilyn Manson is currently using a similar tactic against Evan Rachel Wood. And it sets a precedent for the unpopularity, lack of respectability, or lack of perceived earnestness on the part of the victim to be valid evidence to rule against them. I don't for a second think that this verdict was made based on evidence. I think it was made based on the fact that the jury really felt like Amber Heard just kind of sucks.

And the fact that this trial could become a public spectacle without any regard for the humanity of the individuals who were actually involved in this case... that doesn't sit well with me either, regardless of what either of them did. Public opinion should not sway the decisions of the court, which I think it did here. Public court cases should not be spectated as if they're a WWE fight or the latest season of a reality TV show, which absolutely happened in this case. People shouldn't be lining up around the corner all night just to get a chance to watch the trial in person. People especially shouldn't make money off of creating "content" about high-profile legal trials. Heard and Depp are real people with real lives and real emotions. Their fame doesn't protect them from the incredible emotional toll that having such a publicized, discussed trial has on people. And the callous ignoring of that that we saw throughout this trial is really upsetting.

[bardic-inspo]

Anders (DA:A or DA2, you pick) for the character bingo :D

Ohhhh boy okay, right for jugular! A big big disclaimer: I have literally zero problem with folks who like and enjoy Anders and actively encourage my friends who do enjoy him to keep enjoying him (one of my dearest friends is a big big fan of him). I do not judge anyone for enjoying him. But, this is gonna be Anders critical. If that's not something you want to see, that's totally fine, I'm giving a heads up now. He is a very complicated character I have complicated feelings about.

I'm going with DA2 Anders because I've only played Awakening once. It's also worth mentioning, I've played a Dragon Age based D&D campaign for years that is currently in late Act 2 of the DA2 plot.

Also, CW for minor/brief mention of non-physical abuse.

Anders was my first DA2 romance and I got really really swept up in it. At the end of it, I had a sort of...melancholy, which isn't quite the right word, but it's close. I felt like I'd participated in an abusive relationship, one full of guilt and gaslighting, and the potential threat of violence. Those first two are things that were wielded against me on a regular basis as a kid. And in sticking with him, I felt I sort of...relegated myself to it. There was not a good moment in the game that I felt I got to really address those qualms or where Anders truly accepted responsibility for it. After sort of mulling on that for a while, I decided my canon Hawke stuck with him right until the point of leaving Kirkwall, and at that point made it clear the relationship was over, and they went their separate ways. (Hehe, I tend to ship her with just about everyone in her post-game, but I tend to favor her OT3ing with Isabela and Fenris).

It's really important to me to express, I do think there are ways and choices you can make to view that relationship differently. To each their own. I think he is a fascinating character from a narrative/writer perspective and I am glad he is in the series. I feel like fan discourse, at least what I've been exposed to (and I should say, I actively avoid it and avoid most Anders content) makes him out to be a little too black and white.....so often any conversation about him just boils down to what he did with the Chantry, as if that's the only choice he's ever made that could have a moral judgment. This is why I marked "done dirty by fans". Most of my dislike for Anders has little to do with the Chantry event itself, but the lead up to it/events preceding it.

I've also had personal experiences with friends making real life corollaries between real world events/politics and Anders as a sort of rebel figure standing for justice and, as a result, draw conclusions on my political views (and my partner's views) based only on my/my partner's dislike for Anders without even asking either of us (or really caring) why it was we didn't like him. So it's not really a judgment on the character, but that has permanently soured him for me, and basically made me never seek out any content related to him.

[Send in a character for opinion bingo]

[hospitalterrorizer]

diary205

4/7-8/2024

sunday -monday

gotta work early tomorrow..

but it's not too bad. today i read something interesting about political ecology and that is in truth a way of managing people/ideas/meaning so as to keep capital/its methods, a redirection of capital, rather than a negation of it. by this nature, or i suppose, by approaching nature as a system, at least bringing tiqqun in here, the cybernetic models of nature as systems, a multiplicity of systems to either manage and enable, to live 'with' and use, rather than to exploit, to maintain a smooth process of accumulation over what could end. the essay at a point brings up that capital can no longer be understood as the dominion of death over life, but a living domination of life. i am quite taken by this, not as a positive but it i suppose makes us point our gaze towards ends, time, slow down and what could end accumulation. in many ways the essay also brought to mind foucault, when it at points brings up the constant evaluation of all, evaluation of us, us in nature, our cooperation/failure, evaluation of technique and so on, this is very much an extension of the disciplinary.

here it is:

i am quite taken with it overall, i like that there is some attack on current trends within the academy that one may notice, and that these perspective are carried out and enabled by institutions in talks and things, reproduced, evaluated as useful and shown around, guiding ideas/methods. methods is maybe the best word here, the author at a point notes that these experts who guide us now appear first in laboratories, or this is where they discover the possibilities.

anyway, i am tired which is why this is so short.

there is an article preceding this one mentioned in the notes section that i want to read tomorrow, as well as some other things.

anyway, today feels sort of big for the music thing, coming down to the wire more, did another listen thru while waiting for my skin to cool so i could wax my face (hair was too short, got nothing, just tweezed a lot instead (lolllll (like usual (like everyday usual)))), and the record's issues aren't very bad, mostly just on a sound basis what has to change is more present snares i'm noticing, and a bit of a shoring up of the sound, standardizing certain things a touch, you know. so yeah, as far as big changes go, or big efforts that are gonna have to be made, about 4 songs need decently sized vocal parts added, one needs to be redone, one needs parts other than choruses written and recorded, one needs half the song recorded and verses written (choruses done), and one short song needs the back half written. there's 2 songs here that need little pieces added and i have the new lyrics for those parts, and there's one that needs me to do one thing. that is where the vocal stuff is at, pretty good, imo.

currently trying to get thru the first page of master related notes, as in crossing stuff off my checklist, tonight i'll be 8 songs in, tomorrow should be as easy, and then i listen again and check where things are/how they sound.

everything is sounding better now w/ these notes in place. siccck!!

so first 8 songs of 33 looking much better, unfortunately in that 8, 3 still need vocal work, so they're kinda distant from being done, but that is okay... i'll get there.

funny thing about yesterday, going into work dressed how i normally do, they didn't really recognize me immediately.

anyway i am sleepy now, and i have to be at work by 11:15, so

byebye!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[randomclam24]

Functioning people don't see our problems as we present them because we are lying when we present them - we *are* the problems we manifest, and that is absolute With Republicans, we "Send It Up" as Kanye liked to put it so that our trailer-park-baby problems can be *corrected*, of *ourselves*. The blatantly-lazily-called "cOnTrOlLeD oPpOsItIoN pArTy" isn't lagging behind the competition purposelessly!

Any member of functioning democracy, reduced to what is itself just being labelled off as agoraphobia, just looks down and says, seeing we have nothing further to even have the opportunity to get to say, I just feel sorry for all the trailer park babies Most of us, unlike them, were born good - we don't *have* these problems (that's why we tell them - look - even if you weren't, you were born raised and brought up in a relative by-all-means trailer park! and we're filling you in)

Update Also people who get mad about gay *memes* aren't because you're getting on their nerves - you **never** have - like I said, the meta-game of memes always favors the social heirarchy that actually exists, the one you memers yourselves don't like, as you project onto these people as it is, and you don't admit this - they're upset because they're seeing these people using these memes hiding behind the thing(echo chambers (What have they told you)) and aren't even using them correctly (fuck a "the left can't meme" - they've been here as long as the 6000-year pedophile cult you claim!) Now that that's out of the way Look. There's no pedophile cult - that would all just be projection of your vain capitalism. I'm sorry to those who are upset - we've been taking too long *saying* this. Maybe some of you didn't hear it. Like I know some people aren't dumber; they just have *special* problems - that's part of diversity, is making things *neurodiverse*.

1/28 Considering the broad topic of people who draw lines in the sand and - the ones they're talking about, in the first place - in my experience, it's the surefire determiner of whether you're long-gone if it becomes identity-based. That's where, even if you don't have anything horrible that sets a precedent otherwise, everyone can know you're going to ignore reality psychotically as you blindside preemptively with your metapolitics and then play it down with rationalizations unless you're inhibited where then you lash out Unironically the line was set not directly but over the topic of "fursonas" - the thing about this is I've never known anyone like that - the little I have seen is where that isn't the waters that run deep so to speak

Banking on identity

Even if it was white identity, where white alienateds who want to double down - do their schtick, ""inter-white"" racism always existed between nationalities Otherwise, on the reality of the systemic conveniently-tappable identity basis for all to use who *have cared* to be enlightened, there was a study done that showed that all ashkenazi jews are 30th cousins These things come at a clear price

Update The reality is, we don't really have a justification at all for the old world - to begin with, the nature of people today is that they want to *be happy* working their provincial *line-work* jobs, and if anything gets in the way of that, then we shank them like hoodlums in the form of whatever white proxy we can think of. *That's* no better than hoodlums

That is, unless you're to say the things a hoodlum thinks of people as they shoot them are innately *true* of me

Update Look. Line-work jobs are the most that most people can afford. 100-IQ average doesn't make first-world nations; it so clearly makes line-work jobs and self-perpetuatednesses

[It is generational that we have nothing better than to be what Common Filth has coined eunuchs, but the some-in-between rationalizes this so that it directly makes for the after-statement to that: so be happy! we've got *much* to do(as they instantaneously go on with smiles on their faces, having finished delivering a simple rebuttal)][It's called enlightenment? Most right-wingers pretend this *doesn't* exist (fundamentally)(alright most people aren't right-wingers in such a terribly, and *incredibly* specific sense - most people just go along to get along, and only liberals actively push things, that activity being the reason the ones so-called conservatives get butthurt and wage against them: it's the ability of actively pushing things that they never have, the thing in and of itself. (You doubt these things -- The provincial line-work is their entire mode of thinking - these things are esoteric to them!))]

Update Look - first-term president Donald Trump in doing questionably existent deeds for God and country made the inherently butthurts eternally liberal (sic) - it's okay because he fulfilled the position - that got their hearts and minds, and now they think he's the Antichrist. *That* (this being the thing that constitutes the saving of the white race, in and of itself. (*That is*), and that's all there was to it.) "Well if they want to think that, that's *their* prerogative; *we didn't know any better*" - the conservative's anthem

Look, if your people are dysfunctional by what their higher nature formulates, they're going to spin in place - that's okay, because what progress constitutes just looks like line-work anyway from all our experiences There "is no outside"; we think we're doing our jobs so the "boss" will "pay us"

It hurts because there *is* no higher truth than this

Partly I didn't want to attack the provincial family Christianity yet because there are still points to be made, and other reasons There is a verse that in order to go to heaven, you will have to do more than the scribes - most people have not experienced firsthand the cranking nature of Israeli paid shills on 4chan which basically sums up our structure of self-empoweredness. They see them in the end as, they really have nothing better to do. That's a verse meaning that I know goes beyond what they write off the religion as, being no more than empathy (and you probably get in trouble for it)

Really, you don't talk badly about the provincial family Christianity - that's the underpinning that we don't do anything, because it's the lynchpin whenever we get to a certain point definitively - most people never remain at that point to realize, we're inevitably

Update To our not-detriment, what our enemies are doing is enlightening.

I don't know what to do with it because every time I consider returning it to sender against jews I imagine they would just tell us to fuck right off for the exact same rationalizations as liberals always are

All the things that they are worrying about are things that pertain to the act of enlightening

All the world stage is allegedly in reality a bunch of factions of the exact same nature of elites

If I try example-setting, the reality of the example carried on the world stage will pertain to one of these entities, *not* aNy OtHeR wAy(like that's a concept)

The world stage plays out like a god damn script, and I'm not qualified as a script writer

Update You're just buttmad that you can't start a business yourself. If you had what it takes, you would *overlook* these.

That's 100%.

Update Look. The message of George Floyd was that your descriptions get too self-insistent, and we don't *have* the chance to enlighten ourselves out of this, whatever it is - you don't *have* the choice to wonder!

Update You know how there's way-too-obligatorily spinoff racing games? When you're in the stretch, you don't think about things *other* than the connection of the immediate waypoints

How I actually said it internally: "wacing games?" This is part of adulthood. I'm just a little baby who doesn't want to do this, and look what fruit that yields - look! I'm crashing and turning and nothing's happening

Update The entire reason for my not wanting to ever see specifically Joe Biden's mannerisms - just on an unconscious level, we just have to do things as they're laid out before us to win, and - it literally doesn't matter what material is of them (he's literally setting the example as a senile old man whose sentences in the memes are inherently completely incoherent) - we just trust

as the example by Trump has already been set.

You know that, right?