#the casual racism she exhibits is what kills me

[cuntwrap--supreme]

My sister's boyfriend - whose family is from Jamaica - is visiting for the week. At every turn, my mom finds a way to bring up American slavery. She asked him if his family had been part of the space trade and he's just like, "Well, we're black and from the Caribbean, so I'd imagine so." She has also been cooking every night he's been here. But it's always the most bland, most white food you can imagine. Last night was chicken pot pie. Today was chicken and rice. And this kid heard "chicken and rice" and told my sister he imagined it would be like how his mom makes it - the Caribbean way with tons of veggies and spices and, you know, flavor. Nope! My mom's recipe for chicken and rice is: Boil chicken, boil rice, stick those in a pot in the oven with 2 cups water and 4 bouillon cubes. That's it. I'm waiting on my mom to go back to her room so I can go get him fast food, because he says it's so bland he can't eat it. He and my sister made a TikTok about how he's "fighting for his life" having to eat all this white people food. I might try to cook tomorrow so dude doesn't starve.

[kittyphoenix12-xx]

Hi!

About that why did you get billy hate poll... Personally i dont post about billy or harringrove so i never had any hate targeted at me, and i cant vote in zhe poll because of it. BUT i had to block so many accounts and tags because i couldnt go into the billy hargrove tag without encountering these mile long posts about how awful we all are. I know you know these posts too well, so i wont detail how according to the antis we are all racist assholes. The worst part is that when i first joined the fandom i saw so many of these that i almost believed them. You know, when a bunch of people are all saying the same bs but you start to doubt yourself, it really sucked. It effected me enough thst i had a hard time "confessing" to my real-life (aka not online) friends who are casual fans of the show that he was my favourite character. And the funny part is most of them couldnt even care less, cause being such a passionate anti for a fictional character and writing 10k essays on how awful that FICTIONAL CHARATER is and therefore his fans and the actor too IS NOT NORMAL BEHAVIOUR! It is as chronicly online as it gets. There was only one friend of mine who was suprised and since she is a very opinionated person started to explain to me how SHE COULD NEVER LOVE HIM and she is suprised that i care about him. I tried to explain to her that i know that he behaves like an asshole but its due to his background and i believe would he have gotten the same treatment as steve he could have been redeemed, i was hit with the classic tonedeath answer:

Well my home life wasnt sunshine and puppies either but i dont go around beating up kids

At that point i just gave up in arguing honestly and then i felt like an idiot for not putting up more of a fight, cause this made it feel like her argument i agreed with. God.

I love billy so much, but all this negativity that comes with being in the fandom just drains me.

my dear anon, you are absolutely correct and i hope you have a lovely day.

i confess that when i first watched stranger things, i didn't like billy that much. and i handled that by not engaging with media about him, you know, like a normal person. this was just after s2 came out so i wasn't active on tumblr, i wasn't writing fanfiction, i wasn't in the fandom (and I'm glad let me tell you). but i was also thirteen and related to max more than billy, but the older i got, the more mature and aware i became of just the world in general.

in my humble opinion, the vocal billy antis are ignorant. they don't want to a conversation, they don't want to discuss nuance or entertain the idea of people unlearning things.

we've reached a place in this world where racism and homophobia and ableism are so prevalent that people forget that these things are taught and can therefore be unleant. because a lot of the real life people don't want to unlearn, or can't.

and that idea as spread into fandom spaces. I've said it before and I'll say it again, but the fact that people's response to children/teenagers saying racist/homophobic things is to immediately call for their death is a bad thing actually. and yes, it's spread to characters as well.

it's all performative. i made that poll just to see how performative antis are and, yeah, the results aren't great.

another thing i've noticed about people in general is that they tend to hate characters that exhibit their *embarassing* flaws. media that has racist/homophobic characters in the bad positions aren't really loved by people who hold those views.

^^^^ i think this summarises what i'm trying to say. no one wants to be the bad guy, so when they see something that forces them to confront that part of them, they push it away, deny it.

billy/harringrove stans have been harrassed, told to kill ourselves, called slurs and yet the people who say those things think they're right because they can't fathom being wrong.

so, anon, what i've learnt from my six months in this fandom, is to embrace it. yea billy was going to hit the kids with his car, i actively encourage that now. yea billy was going to kill everyone, he should've killed them all.

but no matter what, we love and support each other. so feel free to ramble in my ask box whenever, start posting on your blog about billy, do whatever you want.

they don't matter to us. they can't matter to us. fandom should be safe and it should be fun and those people are making themselves miserable. and that isn't our fault and it isn't our problem.

[comrade-meow]

Dawn had only just broken over the mountains. While most of the women and children on the camping grounds were still asleep, others were already wide awake, huddling together in the first rays of sunlight and drinking coffee.

To a casual observer, this place might have seemed similar to any mainstream festival campsite. A distinguishing factor, however, was that there wasn’t a single man in sight. The sign on the main entrance left no one in doubt that only women and children were welcome at this event: “Men not permitted to enter.”

Women’s participation in Mexico’s 25-year-old Zapatista National Liberation Army, or EZLN movement, has represented an incredible organizational achievement since its original uprising in 1994. On International Women’s Day, the female militants of the EZLN did not fail to meet expectations when welcoming 7,000 people to the “First International Political, Artistic, Sports, and Cultural Encounter for Women who Struggle.”

Two thousand indigenous Zapatista women from various parts of Chiapas state and 5,000 visitors from all over the world came to Caracol Morelia, near the northeastern town of Altamirano, to hear what they had to say.

Uniting women

The event was entirely initiated by women of the EZLN. They planned it from beginning to end, and made sure everyone who attended was allocated a sleeping place, had access to drinking water and was cared for in the case they fell sick during the three days the event took place. Zapatista events such as these have commonly been accessible via invitation only. This event differed from most of the EZLN’s previous “Escuelitas,” or “Little Schools,” summoning all women and children who were interested in the struggle to overcome misogynistic culture.

“What we wanted was to meet many women,” said Commander Jenny, who coordinated the event. “We thought that only a few women were going to come, so we are very happy to see how many of you have joined us here.” Although only her eyes were visible, a smile was detectable behind her black balaclava. “It has been hard work, but we are very pleased to see that there are many other women who are fighting patriarchy.”

The event was not only an opportunity to create educational or professional networks, but also a space to consider one’s health and well-being as a woman in the fight for justice. There were activities ranging from workshops, discussion panels and movie screenings to theater performances, art exhibitions and sports events, including basketball and soccer matches. Themes included gender violence, self-defense, self-care, sexism in the media, sexual rights, health and education, misogyny and childhood, discrimination against indigenous LGBTQ communities, women environmental rights defenders, and decolonization. All of the activities were led and held by women, and all of them were aimed at generating consciousness of gender inequality or the restoration of women’s self-confidence and autonomy.

“Capitalism is not only colonial, it is also patriarchal and racist,” said Fernanda Esquivel, a 20-year-old student from Guadalajara. “To come here and see that the Zapatistas are still resisting and have resisted for so many years is a huge inspiration for me. Being with so many women and feeling united also makes me feel hopeful about really creating a change. In academia there is nothing that can show you what it is like to come here, and to feel and share these experiences in practice.”

Young women like Esquivel have grown up watching the Zapatistas evolve and followed their fight through media reports, the Zapatista’s own communication channel, “Zapatista Connection,” and more recently a Facebook page and YouTube account. Women from a total of 42 different countries, some of whom were already familiar with women’s movements or other social, political or environmental activism, attended the event in hopes that they would gain skills and inspiration from the women’s Zapatista struggle.

“Apart from wanting to amplify my vision of how different fights against the extractive industries are developing,” said Katherin Cruz from the National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders in Honduras, which accompanies women human rights defenders involved in territorial conflicts. “I came here so I could recharge my batteries and take home experiences that strengthen me individually and prepare me for the work that I do, and for my political activism within the feminist movement in Honduras.”

The birth of the EZLN

In 1983, a group of indigenous peasants in Chiapas organized in secret, educating themselves politically and creating an entirely unique philosophy that insisted that “another world is possible,” one that focuses on collectivity, serving the Zapatista community and creating an autonomous social and economical environment for themselves within neoliberal and capitalist Mexico. Finally on January 1, 1994 the group went public, calling themselves the Zapatista National Liberation Army, named after the hero of the 1910 Mexican Revolution, Emiliano Zapata. That day, the EZLN launched an armed uprising, occupied seven towns in Chiapas, including San Cristóbal, and declared war on the Mexican government.

During their brief occupation, followed by a 12-day battle, the EZLN criticized the effects of global capitalism on local farmers and indigenous land. They drew attention in particular to the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, calling it a death sentence for the indigenous peasants of Mexico. NAFTA would be responsible for dismantling collective land rights secured by the Mexican constitution and prioritizing export manufacturing. The Zapatistas fought for a fairer distribution of wealth, as well as the right to political participation for indigenous people in Mexico.

After their initial uprising, in 1996 the Zapatista organization gained constitutional recognition from the state through the San Andres Accords and formed the National Indigenous Council. The Mexican government did not comply with the agreements and the Zapatistas continued to suffer from violent attacks, such as the Acteal Massacre in 1997, where 45 Zapatista sympathizers were killed in Chiapas. Since then, they have peacefully organized mass marches and protests, created their “caracoles,” or administrative headquarters, formed autonomous governance, justice, health and education systems and launched public campaigns drawing attention to continued racism and discrimination in Mexico. According to the Mexican newspaper El Universal, the EZLN now governs over 250,000 indigenous people living in the Autonomous Rebellious Zapatista Municipalities in Chiapas.

Today, the image of the Zapatista soldiers, clad in red scarves and balaclavas, has reached some of the most remote corners of the world. Their movement is now well known for its transition from armed struggle to nonviolent resistance to advance their demands for indigenous land rights and autonomy, which has triggered tremendous support and solidarity from anti-capitalist activists globally. However, many of the major issues for indigenous communities addressed by the Zapatistas, such as abandonment and marginalization, continue to exist in Chiapas and other parts of impoverished Mexico.

Women’s involvement and participation

During the gathering, Commander Marina took the stage to tell the story of the first female Zapatistas, their struggle for recognition in a male-dominated space and their experience of clandestine meetings prior to their public appearance in 1994. “We took our safety very seriously so that no one would realize where we were going. We had meetings in the mountains, these were very important. We had talks on politics, read books and watched films. We studied the situation of poverty our community was submerged in,” she said. “There was nothing to gain trying to demand things from our bad government.”

The backdrop of the women’s movement within the Zapatista struggle reveals extreme levels of violence against women, poverty and abandonment from any sort of federal health or educational institutions. Intersectional discrimination for being poor, indigenous and women was commonplace, and girls were often forced into marriages or sold by their fathers or families. During the opening ceremony of the encounter, the Zapatistas made it clear that women were sidelined and perceived by the community as second-class citizens. According to Commander Flor, even “midwives would charge less when girls were born.”

Their struggle has led the women in the ranks of the EZLN — which comprise about a third of the organization’s participants — to see themselves from a different perspective and shed light on the problematic behaviour caused by gender inequality. “At the beginning, we were not used to saying our opinions, or having discussions. We would all agree to everything and nod our heads,” Marina said. “We had to fight among our own compañeros, since it took a lot for them to understand the rights we have as women. There is a lot left to achieve but we are convinced that we will accomplish our ideals because we are organized, and we are strong as a collective. We have put fear and doubt aside.”

Many followers of the Zapatista revolution were not aware of the key elements that formed the movement before going public in 1994. Undeniably, one of the key characteristics that shaped the movement was the “Women’s Revolutionary Law,” passed by the Zapatista committees in 1992.

For Sylvia Marcos, a sociologist and expert on indigenous movements across the Americas, the emphasis on women’s rights is a defining factor for the organization. Furthermore, she indicates that these rights were claimed not solely for women as individuals, but were “fully linked and interwoven with collective rights.”

The unique transformations achieved by the Zapatista indigenous movement are manifest in its attempt to re-imagine gender and decolonize oppressive discourse for the sake of personal empowerment.

Enduring inspiration

Over the last three decades, the revolution continues to abide by laws made by the autonomous Zapatista government. With military strategist and spokesperson Subcomandante Marcos “resigning” from his activities, the Zapatistas have moved out of the media spotlight. However, the successful turnouts for their events prove that the Zapatistas are still an important source of inspiration for social mobilizations and women’s movements today.

Not simply an iconic reminder of what indigenous communities were up against in the past, the Zapatistas are engaging in great efforts to revise their strategies and continue to create networks of people who resist, especially among women. Though alternative visions of gender relations have flourished among the Zapatistas, women in the movement continue to suffer gender violence and are battling other issues not uncommon in Chiapas, such as malnutrition, and lack of access to health care and education.

The Zapatistas are addressing some of these issues through their own internal initiatives. Part of their collective work towards independence and sustainability relies on their agroecological farming projects, coffee sales, cooperative shops, community kitchens, traditional medicine and tortilla businesses. However, the fundamental purpose of the Zapatista movement is to promote their way of life and organize collective resistance to resource appropriation, historically-determined economic and social disadvantages and institutional neglect, which exacerbate poverty, sustain the governmental elite and destroy local traditions. Much of their work revolves around inspiring new generations to begin their own journey towards deconstructing norms in their respective societies.

The Zapatista movement currently functions like an organization that promotes constructive dialogue, communication and continued reflection on problems that affect their communities, as well as a support network for other national movements, including the water conflict affecting the indigenous Yaqui community, the 43 Ayotzinapa students missing since 2014 and the recent presidential campaign by the indigenous activist Maria de Jesus Patricio Martinez.

Women’s participation within the EZLN has played a key role in their success and ideology. They have made it clear that there will be no democracy without them. What the event last month demonstrated to many of those who were present, was the need to create safe spaces for all women, which allow them to heal and inspire them to continue fighting their own battles in their own ways. “We made an agreement, and that agreement was to live!” Commander Marina said. “And since, for us, living is fighting, we agreed to fight — each of us according to our means, our place and our time.”

[tyranasauruslex]

Team No-One 2.0

I just want to say that this is just my opinion and opinion are not facts; if you support Shane/Jeffree etc then there's no judgement from me. I’m feeling very disappointed with everything right now, hence the essay. Before anyone comes at me in my inbox I do not hate Shane; I’m just incredibly tired and disappointed with his continued association with problematic people.

Shane and Andrew are under the cut. 

Jeffree

I do not believe for one second that any of what Jeffree said in his video was the truth and it’s in situations like this that Jeffree shows you exactly who is; he has not changed one bit. Jeffree is willing to start a mess just as long as the mess goes in his favour, only this time he didn’t recon with James fighting back. I don’t even care about who said what or who did what to who; its about taking accountability and admitting that you said some fucked up things but actually meaning it. Only Jeffree has never had to take accountability for anything because people like Shane keep giving him passes so he carries on with his toxic behaviour. He likes to say he’s brutally honest but in reality, he’s just brutal; bitches, cunts, sluts, disgusting, kill yourself are all things he’s said towards people (mainly women i might add) within the last year. This behaviour is disgusting and the “i was in a dark place” is getting old and tired by now. We’ve all had dark times and I’ve been through some shit but I would never resort to calling people vile names because they didn’t agree with me. I was very badly bullied whilst I was at school and it hurts my heart to see Shane and Andrew sticking up or someone like Jeffree. 

Jeffree deleted over a thousand problematic tweets before Tati’s video dropped-  when you are a good person you don’t have a thousand problematic skeletons in your closet that could ruin you if they got out. Its the same with Shane who was deleting old videos when James Charles dropped his video exposing Jeffree and Tati. If you don’t have anything to hide and you stand by what you’ve said in the past why delete them?? The things that Jeffree has done are so well documented, with actual receipts, by now that I can not comprehend how he still gets a pass. The casual racism he exhibits and his ignorance should not be tolerated. A grown ass man spit in my best friends face when we were twelve and called her one of the terrible slurs that Jeffree has used - that’s what happens when racism is not dealt with and Jeffree is teaching that to his audience. It honestly makes me feel sick whenever I see that video of him screaming at those women, and no it does not matter that they were white.  

Shane

When it comes to Shane I’m almost past the point of caring; he’s friends with multiple problematic people who are constantly in drama but he always manages to excuse their behaviour. Trisha was being racial insensitive less than a week ago and refusing to acknowledge she’d bullied and spread lies about another youtuber. Trisha even said in her vlog that Shane told her she hadn’t done anything wrong which either means his morals are completely fucked or he gets off on other people acting the fool. He has a young audience and by allowing people like Jeffree a platform on his channel Shane is effectively telling them all that this type of behaviour is ok. To anyone that thinks Shane was dragged into the drama, he dragged himself into it by shadily tweeting about “pig tummy tea” and advertising Tati’s vitamins when James was being dragged across the internet. Tweeting “lets all just be nice to each other” is such a cop out especially when he was one of the people stirring the pot and did not lend any type of support for James. He got himself in too deep and stayed silent which is almost worse than what he did by sticking up for Jeffree. He has a massive audience and for him to go on record as saying bullying of any kind is not ok would have done the world of good. 

Shane could offer his platform to people who actually deserve it but instead, he decides to latch onto the problematic cool kids and try and be bff’s with them. He could have some truly amazing content if he looked outside the youtube bubble he’s created for himself. I want him to do better and be better. 

Here’s some extra tea for you: A drama channel spilled that they all knew Tati’s video was coming out two weeks ago and Here For The Tea had magically already seen Tati’s video before she made her own. Who went over to Tati’s house just before that? Shane did. Shane also met up with the Dolan twins in March. The whole thing is just gross to me. 

Andrew

I like Andrew I really do but I was so disappointed when he tweeted support to Jeffree when all the vile things that Jeffree accused James of were exposed. To me, that’s him cosigning and agreeing that Jeffree’s behaviour is ok. That Jeffree viscously attacking people is ok. That Jeffree’s problematic behaviour is ok because it doesn’t affect him. The “He’s always nice to me so I don’t care what he does to other people” scenario occurs a lot when Jeffree is involved; Andrew needs to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. I understand that he might be scared of losing his job but if that’s the case then he should have just stayed silent. Add to this that both Morgan and Garrett have spoken about being bullied when they were kids; imagine how hurt they must be seeing Andrew side with Jeffree? I really hope that Andrew can get out of Shane’s bubble for a bit and reconnect with his old friends and live his own life because I really don’t like this side of him we’re seeing. 

[purplethebunny]

In which I describe the experience of speaking with family members about the engagement and creatively rage against my father’s casual heteronormative bullshit.

 The same evening that I cariño encantador propsed to me, I called the blood family members who should probably know before facebook does – there were a lot of witnesses.

I called my sister first, who was sleepy but congratulatory. She texted me a bit more during the evening to really underline it.  My relationship with my sister is…. complicated.  That said, I expect her to essentially respect whatever boundaries I set about wedding planning or whatever with only minimal interference.  I also expect that she has a greater understanding of the meaning of this in my life.  Like, she’s stuck in her paradigm, her desperate need to be loved and how that affects all of her choices, but she understands enough to at least put a face on it for a minute, to be kind about it.

When she texted me later, she said “aren’t you glad you didn’t kill yourself before you met Ruby?”  She’s damn right too.

I called my mom next, who I also woke up.  I think her husband was a biiiiiit irritated, but I’m sure he’ll survive. Mom said congrats and started chatting with me about her recent tooth problem.  She wanted to make sure I’d called my sister.   This was all a little strange – I really don’t think my mom knows what to say.  I don’t think she views my partner as one who is “suitable” for me, and I really do think it’s partially racism, partially her own never-healthily-fulfilled obsession with big, strong men doing big, strong things. My mother is more easily understood if you assume that she has no concept of the fact that other individuals have vastly different internal lives from her own.

I put off talking to my dad until the next day. My father and I aren’t connected on facebook by my choice. I called him in the afternoon the following day, shortly before I had to leave for another task (intentionally).  I tried to hit his cell phone first, but it was straight to voicemail. I reached him at his store.

My dad initially sounded confused.  He sounded entirely baffled.  I can’t entirely understand why because we haven’t enough of a relationship for me to guess.  It was offputting.  We then had what amounts to yet another awkward conversation where we clearly do not speak the same language.

After the bafflement, he congratulated me and began offering advice.  My father is married to his fifth or sixth wife, and while it seems to have staying power, he’s left a swath of life destruction behind him.  My father exhibits the essential selfishness of capitalism: get the best deal you can out of anyone.  I believe the only kind thing my mother has ever said about him is that he always paid his child support on time.  I wouldn’t even give that (shit’s court ordered yo).

So, when his next statement is “You’ll find real happiness,” I have to swallow my tongue rather than just laugh at him.  “I am happy” I say, trying to communication with the most perfunctory language that I’ve not said yes because I’m bound by some biblical or cultural scripture, trying to communicate that I am happy.  

“Oh no,” he responds, “I mean several years down the line when the honeymoon has worn off.”  It strikes me that we haven’t anything close to the same conceptual understanding of relationships, the importance of them in our live, or neurobiology.  I’m stuck and can’t respond.  What I’d like to explain is that we DID that.  We’ve DONE that.  And that I have genuinely more experience in relationships than he does, in vulnerability and courage, in adoration and foolhardiness.  I have significantly more experience than he does in owning up to my mistakes, in forgiveness and acceptance, in staying through and being stronger for it than he ever has. I want to tell him how cowardly I find him, how disgusting I think his treatment of all the women in his life is, but I’m stuck on my tongue, on how to phrase it without destroying whatever this is. So he keeps talking.

He talks about his wife, how they’ve been together for 18 years and how there are disappointments and battles and things they can’t stand but how they just “get used to it” and are too old to change now.  Like, how do I respond that I could have settled, I could have torn out pieces of me and left them behind like breadcrumbs in a forest of unrelenting dick pics?  How I could have refused any sort of risk, how I’ve done that?  How I already know how to origami myself inside of myself until I am a frog, a bird, a flower, instead of a galaxy? How do I explain that I’m unwilling to settle, that I know it takes courage to be with me and that this is part of what my dear love, shaking and sweating but with his strong voice, offered me when he asked me to be his wife?

I don’t.

I say “Well, I’m glad you have because Judy’s kind of great.”  And she is, for someone I’ve met a dozen times and whom I haven’t had a proper conversation with since I was in my 20s.  She’s fine.

He replies jovially “Yeah, I only really stay with her for the income and cooking.  You know how men are.”  Cue laughter.

I don’t say anything.

Later, when telling my roommate of this (known ‘im since I was 14 and he knows my dad) he laughed and said “Chuck is such a slimeball HERPADERPA BETTER LEARN TO COOK.”  

Later, when I told my partner about this, he responded “HAAA!  He thinks I’m a man.”

Right in that moment I just can’t tell him how incredibly stupid he sounds and, you know, I think we’ve reached the point where the gulf between our experiences and values is too great to bridge without extensive emotional labor. Labor that I do not want to provide because he sees it as his right. Labor I am unwilling to provide because the men in my life deserve better than a crude joke suggesting they have an inability to perform basic functions.

I stay silent and he awkwardly tries to pick the conversation back up.  He asks me to send a picture, which I later realize is because he has no idea who my partner is.

This is the most surreal moment for me.  All of my father’s relationships from my mother onward have had some distinct affect on my life (Judy’s is mostly stability).  I realized that my father has no awareness of who my partner is because he sees my relationships from the lens of teenage romance.  My father is under the impression that “millennial” does not mean “adult under 40”.  My father is entirely unaware that I am an adult closer to mammogram time than I am away from it.  My partner is nearly 40.  Neither does he know my partners name, background, or what is important and beautiful about our relationship.

I send my father the picture, putting us against a rainbow backdrop in my house as the only “fuck you” I can manage.

I feel like a coward, but since I don’t assess this relationship as worth the work or risk it would take to fix it, I don’t think I can do elsewise at this time.  I think this particular relationship is headed for a change.  

[brigdh]

Reading Lately

The Last Camel Died at Noon by Elizabeth Peters. The sixth book in the Amelia Peabody series, murder mysteries set in the late 1800s and starring an incredibly blunt, overly self-confident, ironically melodramatic female Egyptian archaeologist. In this one, Amelia, her husband, and their young son are looking forward to excavating some pyramids south of Egypt, in the lesser-known ancient kingdom of Kush, when they get caught up in a mystery involving a long-lost British couple and their feckless rich nephew, a mysterious hidden kingdom that still practices the ancient Egyptian religion, court politics with two princes competing to be the next king, and a veiled woman who seems to be the secret power behind the throne. It's all a parody-slash-loving tribute to Victorian adventure novels, particularly "King Solomon's Mines" and "She". Peters gives these old racist tropes a modern update, which works in some parts better than others. I loved the eventual reveal that the 'good' prince of the hidden kingdom speaks in a stilted English because he's deliberately modeling himself after the florid heroes of H. Rider Haggard's novels, of which he is a huge fan. Similarly, when Amelia is told to look out for a secret messenger carrying "the book", it turns out not to be the Bible or the Egyptian Book of the Dead or some such sacred text, but a copy of Wilkie Collin's "The Moonstone". On the other hand, the mystery eventually comes down to the Peabodys' desperate rescue of the one young innocent white girl out of this entire kingdom, which is... uh, less great. To say the least. I also felt like this book frequently dragged in places. There's a loooooong section in England before they leave for Egypt. Then a loooooong section in Nubia before they find the hidden kingdom. Then a loooooong section exploring the kingdom before the plot finally arrives. I don't think The Last Camel Died at Noon actually has more pages than any other book in the series, but goddamn if it didn't feel like it took three times as long to read. So, not my favorite Amelia Peabody, but I'm still looking forward to the next one! The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet by Becky Chambers. A light-hearted ensemble space opera, starring the crew of a mid-level spaceship. The main character (as much as there is one; this is an extremely team-focused book) is Rosemary, a nice young woman, just out of college and somewhat sheltered, who arrives at the Wayfarer at the opening of the book to serve as their clerk. However, she's more than she seems: working under a false name and hiding secrets that will be revealed late in the book. Also onboard is Captain Ashby, a human in a long-term relationship with Pei, an alien arms dealer whose culture is HUGELY against interspecies sex; Jenks, an engineer who's fallen in love with the ship's sentient AI and is considering downloading her into a physical body despite this being incredibly illegal; Dr Chef, the kindly doctor and cook who comes from a nearly extinct species and whose sweetness covers a backstory of war and angst; Corbin, in charge of the algae from which the ship gets most of its power, a gumpy, racist, introvert; Kizzy, an antic, cheerful engineer and the only character who doesn't get much an arc, though she's a lot of fun in the background; and Ohan, who has the ability to navigate through hyperspace due to being infected with a virus that's slowly killing him. There's also the pilot Sissix, from a lizard-like species that practices polyamory, casual sex and lots of touching, who's a bit tired of dealing with all the culture clashes this causes on a mostly-human ship. She and Rosemary eventually enter into a relationship, which I mention because you gotta love a book in which a f/f open romance can be dropped in as a subplot. On the other hand, there isn't much of a main plot; this is very much a character-driven book instead of one with a clear, driving endgoal. Instead various characters meet and overcome minor difficulties, and it's all just nice if fairly inconsequential. The best part of The Long Way to a Small, Angry Planet is absolutely how much *fun* it is. The worldbuilding is full of charming tossed off ideas, the scifi elements of the background are hugely inventive and clever, the characters are generally enjoyable to spend time with, and there's a ton of bits that made me laugh with pure delight. Like this section, which never ends mattering, but is too cute not to share: The mech tech herself was perched on a work ladder, her head and hands up inside an open ceiling panel. Her hips rocked in time with the drum beats. She belted along to the throbbing music as she worked. “Punch ‘em in the face! Monkeys like it, too!” “Hey. Kizzy,” Jenks said. “I ate a har - monica! These socks — match — my hat!” “Kizzy.” A tool clattered to the ground. Kizzy’s hands clenched into fists as the music swelled to a stormy crescendo. She danced atop the shuddering ladder, her head still in the ceiling. “Socks! Match — my hat! Socks! Match — my hat! Step on — some — sweet — toast! Socks! Match — my hat!” “Kizzy!” Kizzy ducked her head down. She pressed the clicker strapped to her wrist, turning down the volume of the nearby thump box. “Sup?” Jenks quirked an eyebrow. “Do you have any idea what this song is?” Kizzy blinked. “Socks Match My Hat,” she said. She went back up into the ceiling, tightening something with her gloved hands. “Soskh Matsh Mae’ha. It’s banned in the Harmagian Protectorate.” “We’re not in the Harmagian Protectorate.” “Do you know what this song’s about?” “You know I don’t speak Hanto.” “Banging the Harmagian royal family. In glorious detail.” “Ha! Oh, I like this song so much more now.” “It’s credited with setting off the riots on Sosh’ka last year.” “Huh. Well, if this band hates the establishment that much, then I doubt they’ll care about me making up my own words. They can’t oppress me with their ‘correct lyrics.’ Fuck the system.” My main problem is that, as sweet and nice as all this is, there's just not much there there. I felt like every time a potentially interesting conflict arose, the book went with the easiest possible answer; I was particularly annoyed with the resolution of Rosemary's background in this regard. It was a pleasant read, but not the sort of thing that will stick in my memory. Still, thank you to everyone who recommend this to me! :D I did have a good time with it. Venom: The Heroic Search for Australia's Deadliest Snake by Brendan James Murray. A nonfiction book about the taipan, the most venomous snake in the world (well, depending on how one measures such things), and the effort to capture a living snake for study and to enable the production of an antivenom. Murray is far more interested in the story of the people involved in this search than he is in the snake or its biology, which ends up producing a book that reads a lot like an action movie. Which is not a criticism! I loved how much this felt like a suspenseful thriller. There were a few scenes that were so unbelievably wild I had to read them out loud to my partner. Murray focuses on four people in particular: George Rosendale, a young Aboriginal man (only 19 when he was bitten in 1949) who is the only person ever known to have survived a taipan bite without being treated with antivenom; Bruce Stringer, a ten-year-old who was bitten in 1955 and became the first human to receive the then brand-new antivenom; Kevin Budden, an amateaur herpetologist who in 1950 captured the first living taipan but who died in the process; and John Dwyer, a friend of Budden's who in his memory captures the second living taipan, said snake becoming both the most significant contributor to antivenom production and the first taipan to be exhibited in a zoo. Between these men and others featured more briefly, Venom is packed full of exciting stories of hunting snakes through jungles and sugarcane fields, and medical dramas in which lives are saved or lost as doctors and amateurs struggle to find the best treatments. It's not all page-turning adventures though; I appreciate how much attention Murray gave to the role of colonialism and anti-Aboriginal racism, both in Rosendale's personal life and the larger scope of Australian history. I do have a few criticisms. Murray jumps back and forth between so many characters (are they still called characters if they're real people? whatever) and between so many time periods that I was often confused and had trouble remembering who was who. Less significantly, I longed for a epilogue or short final chapter that would have covered what we now know about taipan. A great deal of Venom is taken up with scientists arguing over what were unknowns in the 1940s and 50s – is the taipan a separate species from the Eastern Brown Snake? Is it venomous? If so, how much? how big does it get? where can it be found? how far south does its range extend? – that by the time I reached the end of the book, I was desperate for answers! Don't make me do my own research, Murray, especially since I'm too lazy to go past Wikipedia. Overall, I'd absolutely recommend this to anyone who enjoys creepy biology or exciting history. I read this as an ARC via NetGalley.

[DW link for easier commenting!]

[sage-nebula]

If you are still doing the ask meme, can you do the TSME trio + Wallace please?

I’ve already answered for Alan and you can find that response here, but I can do the others!

—Manon—

General Opinion: 

fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual light of my life

Aesthetic Attractiveness Level: 

get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically aesthetically attractive but not my type | pretty aesthetically attractive | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

Okay, I feel the need to clarify … on the one hand, I think that Manon’s design is nice (insofar as her hair and eyes, et cetera), and I do like the fact that she likes green since I headcanon her as being a grass-type specialist when she’s older. However, I despise the colors green and red together. Honest to god, it looks like Christmas. She looks like Christmas. So like, on the one hand, I like her design! But then my brain kicks in and sees the red and green and is like “why this, she looks like an elf.”

So like, I like her design, but also my brain sometimes screams “CHRISTMAS” whenever I look at her, so. The conflict is real.

Hogwarts House: 

Gryffindor | Slytherin | Ravenclaw | Hufflepuff

Finally, a Slytherin! And yes, Manon is very, very Slytherin. I’m 100% sure of this. (Which is another reason why green is very fitting for her, but with her hair … !)

Best Quality:

Undoubtedly, her loyalty and devotion to those she loves! One of the things that makes Manon so very, very Slytherin is that she is very attached and devoted to those she loves. She’s very much one who is there for her people, which may be a small little group, but that is her small little group. And when a Slytherin defends their people, they defend their people, both in the sense that they will literally defend them from danger and they will champion for and promote them as well. (So like, Manon being so excited about Alan winning the finals? Manon always, always rooting for him no matter what? Throwing him a party? But also, despite her own terror, risking her life to go save him in TSME 3? All hallmarks of a Slytherin.) Whether it’s Alan or Hari-san or someone else dear to her, Manon will throw everything else to the wind until she’s sure that they’re safe. It’s not that she doesn’t care about the world, but it’s just that, to her, the world is less important than her loved ones. The world can wait, as far as Manon is concerned. Her people come first. And I definitely think that this is both one of Manon’s better qualities and one of the most interesting aspects of her character.

Worst Quality:

That said, Manon has a very bad tendency to disregard what others want or feel in comparison to what she wants, and has a very bad understanding of boundaries. This is best shown in her relationship with Alan, actually, in that they became friends because she wore him down until he said yes, ignoring every “no” and “stop following me” and “go away” that he threw at her. This finally culminates in their fight in TSME 4; while he was trying to push her away for her own protection—while he put an ocean between them in an effort to protect her—Manon refused to take “no” for an answer. And while on the one hand it’s amazing that she had the agency to do that (and good writing to give her the agency to do that), on the other, it’s absolutely, unquestionably wrong for her to ignore his boundaries and refuse to let him end the relationship, regardless of his reasons for doing so (because both parties don’t have to agree—so long as one person wants out of the relationship, that is enough). Manon wasn’t listening to him, wasn’t considering things from his point of view. She listened only long enough to have her turn to speak and argue. That whole thing spiraled horribly, but the point is that Manon was relentless in what she wanted (quite Slytherin, once again!), to the point of ignoring how he felt. It’s a definite flaw of hers, but one she can hopefully learn from even if the show refused to acknowledge it and give her the chance to do so.

Ship Them With:

Serena, though preferably when they’re a little older and Manon has matured a bit more.

In To Devour the Sun—well, slight spoilers for the upcoming chapter, but she has the biggest crush on Lillie, pretty much from first sight. So, while it’s one-sided at the moment, Manon/Lillie as well.

She could probably have a fun relationship with Shauna, too, tbh.

Brotp Them With:

Hari-san, obvs

Alan

Steven Stone

Bonnie

Needs to Stay Away From:

LYSANDRE, though Bonnie and Squishy killed him, so that issue has been dealt with.

In To Devour the Sun, staying away from Lusamine would be a good idea (this is good advice for literally everyone tbh), despite Manon’s precocious crush on her.

Misc. Thoughts:

I like Manon a lot, but I’m really disappointed in the way the anime concluded her arc. I would have appreciated not only having Manon realize her own mistakes which led to Hari-san’s condition as well (because taking responsibility for her own faults would help her grow as a person and a trainer), but also have her set off an independent journey with her pokémon so that she can learn independence and self-confidence, since I think she has very little confidence in herself as a trainer and depends pretty much wholesale on Alan (which he points out in TSME 4, albeit she was not in a place to hear it, and he wasn’t being gentle in his delivery, and so the whole thing was just a poorly communicated mess). I think she’s an interesting character, but the anime definitely dropped the ball.

—Steven Stone—

General Opinion:

fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual light of my life

Aesthetic Attractiveness Level:

get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically aesthetically attractive but not my type | pretty aesthetically attractive | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

Note: Tbh, it’s the anime that moved him to “gorgeous / silver-haired dreamboat” for me, and it’s less because of his appearance (and magical boy tendencies), and more because of the sheer badassery that he showed in the Flare arc, my god, Steven’s moment of “I came out to attack people and I’m having such a good time right now” at the Flare base was AMAZING. He would probably just be “pretty aesthetically attractive” if not for that.

Hogwarts House:

Gryffindor | Slytherin | Ravenclaw | Hufflepuff

Best Quality:

He is an excellent judge of character. Well, in the anime at least.

In the games he behaves rather terribly toward Zinnia, but in the anime he knows that something is off about Lysandre pretty much immediately, and goes along in TSME in order to try and keep an eye on Alan and Manon. He contacts Professor Sycamore (with Manon’s help) to pull him into the loop as well. And though he has that, “Oh woe is me, Lysandre fooled me” line in the Flare arc—that is goddamn bullshit, Lysandre never fooled him for a second, but Steven is going to high-key enjoy getting to lay waste to the Flare base as vengeance for Alan and Manon. >) Revenge is a dish best served with MEGA METAGROSS.

Worst Quality:

In the games, he does exhibit some micro-aggressions toward Zinnia which are … not cool. Specifically, I’m referring to the fact that Zinnia introduces herself to him once, but when they meet again later, we get this exchange:

STEVEN: “You’re the—!”ZINNIA: “The Draconid, yup. Or you could just call me Zinnia.”

Zinnia’s being a bit passive-aggressive there, but tbh she has every right to be. It’s outright stated in-game that the Draconids used to be more spread out across Hoenn, but now they all live at Meteor Falls. It’s very heavily implied that they’re Hoenn’s indigenous people. So it stands to reason that Zinnia may have experienced racism, casual or otherwise, before (especially since she seemed very aware of what he was about to call her). For her to introduce herself once, yet then for Steven to start to call her the Draconid, is not intentionally malicious on Steven’s part (like, I don’t think he’s consciously racist or anything), but it is passively so and is a micro-aggression, and that’s not cool. He might harbor some internalized racism, especially if it’s systemic in the Hoenn region.

On a more broad scale, however, I think that Steven probably has a tendency to be somewhat … caught up in his own affairs, sort of … distant from others, as a result of his upbringing. Steven is very wealthy, and we know this, and we also know from his interactions with Wallace in-game that Steven has a tendency to come across as kind of selfish, what with just expecting Wallace to cover for him as Champion as he does his own thing. I think that Steven’s social skills are rather lacking, that he didn’t have a lot of friends growing up (especially since so few people would treat him like Steven rather than like the heir of Devon, and even now, so few people treat him like Steven rather than Hoenn’s Champion that Alan not recognizing him at first was probably something of a relief), and so at times he can be a bit inadvertently thoughtless, even though he tries his best not to be.

TL;DR: He’s a good guy, but he has made and does make mistakes, and this isn’t even getting into all the shady nonsense that Devon Corporation is up to.

Ship Them With:

Wallace

Brotp Them With:

Alan

Manon

Professor Sycamore

Needs to Stay Away From:

Zinnia and Steven do not mix well. It’s very entertaining for me, however.

Misc. Thoughts:

TSME made me appreciate Steven far, far, far more than I did before. Before I didn’t care about him, with a side order of >/ for the way he treated Zinnia. Now I really like him, and it’s all thanks to the anime. Thanks, anime!

—Wallace—

General Opinion:

fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual light of my life

Aesthetic Attractiveness Level:

get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically aesthetically attractive but not my type | pretty aesthetically attractive | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

Hogwarts House:

Gryffindor | Slytherin | Ravenclaw | Hufflepuff

I honestly don’t remember enough about his characterization to Sort him accurately, so tbh I took a stab in the dark based on what I do remember.

Best Quality:

Mmm, that he’s not as immediately judgmental as Steven? And that he treats Steven as a person rather than just the Devon heir/Champion.

Worst Quality:

Nothing that I can think of, tbh.

Ship Them With:

Steven Stone

Brotp Them With:

Isn’t that one Contest Spectacular idol his niece?

Needs to Stay Away From:

???

Misc. Thoughts:

I honestly haven’t played through AlphaSapphire in years, haha. My memory of Wallace is not that strong. I just remember him sassing Steven a bit and it was great.

[republicstandard]

Why won't the Left Recognize the South African Genocide?

According to Genocide Watch, the political left in the West is engaged in genocide denial. Almost to a man, the Twitterati scramble to point out how, for some reason, the Boer is not really being exterminated in their own lands- or that they had it coming. Welcome to progressive victim blaming. Its fine, so long as the victims are White.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

A message painted on the wall of a police station in #SouthAfrica. I guess now that the Boer has been disarmed in 2000, only the police is left... This is why you don't give up your guns America! pic.twitter.com/KdYwENf6nN

— Willem Petzer (@willempet) March 20, 2018

As pointed out by Jack Montgomery in Breitbart,

“If you look at the footage and read the stories, you hear the accounts, it’s a horrific circumstance they face,” (Australian Home Affairs minister) Dutton had said, arguing that South Africa’s farmers “deserve special attention”.

“I do think, on the information that I’ve seen, people do need help and they need help from a civilized country like ours,” he added — prompting furious demands for a retraction from the South African government.

But rather than welcoming the country���s white minority as refugees, as they would for almost any other group, left-liberal media outlets and pro-migration non-governmental organizations (NGOs) were quick to condemn Dutton, insisting the farmers should be left to their fate.

It is not just Australia- most leftist publications in the West have looked away from this humanitarian crisis. I will give credit where it is due, the Independent has published a relatively clear-eyed report, Newsweek is recognizing the problem for what it is, and RT is ready to report on Julius Malema "cutting the throat of whiteness.”

RT, it should be noted, were making videos about the looming threat of land expropriation in South Africa four years ago. We didn't listen then- but then RT is Russian state media so it was an obvious ploy to influence elections, or something.

🆘‼😯🔥 #SouthAfrica: a white farmer in Bela-Bela (Warmbad), his name is Jakes van Deventer, was killed by several black assailants, and his wife seriously injured. The white farmers' community caught the attackers, these are the weapons they found in their car. pic.twitter.com/5JggfntiYE

— Onlinemagazin (@OnlineMagazin) March 18, 2018

The genocide denial from progressive activists is shameful.

Yassmin Abdel-Magied, who you may remember claims Islam is the most feminist religion, outright denies the South African Genocide and claims that Australia really should import more Muslims instead of skilled White people, because of course she does. She is an unrepentant activist for Islam, but wishes to deny all others the same courtesy for their own faith or ethnic group.

Let me be clear. There is no evidence to prove that white people (aka farmers from South Africa) would be more beneficial to Australia than people from other nations (e.g. Rohingya). As such, it is rubbish to claim they should be provided faster assistance from Australia.

— Yassmin Abdel-Magied (@yassmin_a) March 15, 2018

Apart from centuries of demonstrable farming skills passed from father to son by the Boers, sure. There is no benefit to preferencing skilled people over the unskilled, in Abdel-Magied's book. It is odd indeed that open border advocates like Yassmin suddenly want to build a wall, but with a door that only non-Whites have the key for. Similarly, it is a dishonest ploy to conflate centuries of religious and ethnic conflict in Asia with the genocide in South Africa.

It is not in doubt that the Rohingya are suffering in Myanmar, virtually without aid from neighboring Muslim nations.

Even so, it is strange indeed to advocate for Australian aid for a community defined by political allegiance rather than religious or ethnic grouping when that kind of politics has no connection with Australia. Yassmin draws the line around Islam, and concludes that as she and the Rohingya are both Muslim, that's her team. Fair enough, but this is not a simple case of racist persecution, these issues are deep-rooted. Simply moving the Rohingya to Australia is not a solution to Myanmar's refusal to recognize the Rohingya as citizens or to end the bloodshed. Is it racist for a White country to help White people with whom they share a history as the sons of colonialists? Abdel-Mageid may argue that would be the definition of racism, and to be quite frank I for one do not care, because she would have to own that racism herself.

SHOW 👏🏽 ME 👏🏽 CONCRETE 👏🏽 EVIDENCE 👏🏽 TO 👏🏽 PROVE 👏🏽 ME 👏🏽 WRONG 👏🏽 OH WAIT 👏🏽 YOU HAVE NONE? 👏🏽 YOU'RE SPOUTING DOGWHISTLING BS? 👏🏽 THOUGHT SO 👏🏽 KTHXBYE.

— Yassmin Abdel-Magied (@yassmin_a) March 15, 2018

Australia, a secular society based on Europeans and their Christian values, recognizes the plight of another European Christian descended society and wishes to help. Could not the neighbors of the Rohingya, Muslim countries all, help their co-religionists and provide them support? If we're honestly looking for solutions it is self-evident that people with common cultural, language and ethnic connections integrate into societies easier than those without. This should not be a controversial position, but apparently it is racism to recognize that people in the world are different- unless you are an intersectional leftist, in which case you can recognize differences in relation to White people, in order to leverage power.

South Africa: with the government condoning theft of land of white farmers and doing nothing to stop their murder, 2018 is turning into a bad year if you are white and live in SA. 1.7 farm attacks per day an 1 farmer murdered every 5 days. This is genocide. #SouthAfrica pic.twitter.com/lceenJX8ks

— Miss Jo (@HaramHussy) March 11, 2018

It is racist to claim that Whites can be oppressed- despite this entire article existing as an exercise in highlighting the in-group preference that is exhibited by people of all races and faiths. If it is racist for White Australians to recognize their kinship with White South Africans, why is it not also anti-Kuffar bigotry for Yassmin Abdel-Magied to advocate for her own in-group? Can we not understand that having love and being an advocate for your own people does not necessitate hatred of the other? Abdel-Magied shows here that it is, as usual, group identity for the Muslim, but Christians- watch out. That's racism.

Apart from being such an egregious example of how not to make an argument, the leftist position is clear. If you are White and look at people who look like you being tortured and raped for their skin color with horror, it is you that is the racist. The implicit demand is "What about the non-Whites?" To which the reply should be- what race is more charitable, more willing to aid and more accomodating than those hated Whites? This is a sick ideology, and if it means that we are Alt-Right for opposing racist murderers, count us in. History remembers those who deny genocide.

I find Peter Dutton speaking about white farmers in South Africa while condemning others trying to come to Aus so incredibly racist. It’s one of the most flagrant racist displays I’ve ever seen yet people are applauding him. Pull your fucking shit together Australia!

— Scott Rhodie (@ScottRhodie) March 14, 2018

What we are witnessing is the weaponization of ethnic cleansing in order to promulgate an open-borders and globalist agenda.

To put it mildly, this sticks in the craw. The idea that because the Australian government has been brave enough to recognize reality and try to help that this is somehow racist is not only insulting but exhibits the most appalling kind of anti-White bigotry.

Let me be clear: Farm violence, and crime generally, is a major problem in South Africa. It warrants closer inspection and much stronger policing. However, if you think it constitutes 'white genocide', you're being taken for a ride by race-baiters and proto-fascists.

— Mike Stuchbery 💀🍷 (@MikeStuchbery_) January 20, 2018

Jon Rosenthal of The Economist, who is Jewish, will denounce all genocide except when it happens to Whites.

This is outrageous racism. Australia detains genuine asylum seekers for years, but opens its arms to a bunch of white people who do not face oppression. https://t.co/30Lv0xrnvE

— Jonathan Rosenthal (@rosenthal_jon) March 15, 2018

Australia is racist because Rosenthal disagrees with their immigration policy with regard to helping people flee a genocide- though of course, #NotAllAustralians, Jon. Rosenthal will go so far to argue with a Black South African racist about what a genocide is.

Oh. Now you use the word "zionists" instead of Jews. Very clever. I have denounced apartheid. Will you denounce genocide of Jews?

— Jonathan Rosenthal (@rosenthal_jon) August 29, 2017

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

This is the double standard that is being exhibited to varying degrees across the plaent, when it comes to relations between people of European descent and virtually all others. It has now become common to claim that there is no such thing as Whiteness when it comes to an identity, but Whiteness itself is toxic and must be deconstructed. That is the philosophical root in the West of our neo-Marxist political left.

Judgement Day. The land is ours!!! pic.twitter.com/ZSh2QaBdAd

— andile (@Mngxitama) March 19, 2018

This is the sharp end of the same ideology. This is the result of formented bigotry sanctioned by a state that wholeheartedly agrees that Whiteness itself is evil enough to be met with land expropriation, rape, torture and murder. Is this carnage really what the so-called progressives wish to advance? As we have repeatedly said in this magazine, this is what awaits Western nations, casually waiting for demographics to tilt the balance of power.

BLACK AGENDA ON REPARATIONS FOR SLAVERY, COLONIALISM AND APARTHEID “Justice requires not only the ceasing and desisting of injustice but also requires either punishment or reparation for injuries and damages inflicted for prior wrongdoing. ― Amos Wilson 1/3 pic.twitter.com/LNM8Cb35Cm

— Lindsay Maasdorp (@LindsayMaasdorp) March 19, 2018

The rhetoric is the same as that parroted by the benign social justice advocates in your own town. The weepy students who wail about wanting safe spaces and segregated housing because of the evil Whites oppressing them will not speak out against this genocide. They deny it. They will not condemn the South African government, they will say, well the power dynamics are shifting and this is a good thing thanks to centuries of colonialism, and South Africa should belong to Black people. Apart from highlighting how the left really sees multiculturalism -as a weapon against Whites- this is dishonest, upstream thinking. The same thinking begat the extermination of the Kulaks with the Holodomor, but for some reason many leftists don't like to talk about that, either.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

The Deputy President of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) manhandles/intimidates Afrikaner journalist outside of parliament in South Africa You won't see any pro-EU politicians condemning this though. pic.twitter.com/8ttUvSQWIw

— Defend Europa (@DefendEvropa) March 20, 2018

The South African Genocide is real. search #plaasmoorde on Twitter. Spread the word. Contact your local representative and demand action.

Thank you for reading Republic Standard. We publish this magazine and the Freebird Forum because we believe in free speech- but it doesn't come cheap! Will you make a small donation towards our running costs? You can make a difference by clicking here.

The Republic Standard Web Shop is now open! Every piece of merchandise you buy is a victory against the nerds.

from Republic Standard | Conservative Thought & Culture Magazine http://ift.tt/2G7BDNR via IFTTT

[alomgv86-blog]

State of our "Union"

I have been processing what is happening in our country as of last week. I really worry about what we have become. I want to say that I feel like this hits close to home since I was born and raised in Virginia. I lived there until I was 18 years old and during my time there I saw racism. People casually making racist jokes, stereotypes, and the love of the confederate flag. I would cringe at the amount of ignorance present but my hope was that future generations would exhibit less of these traits. As I watch or read news regarding the tragic events at Charlottesville, I think how did we get to this point. I feel like I want to say so many things I don’t know if I can even put this information into words. Sorry in advance if this sounds jumbled, I am just so frustrated. First, I think why are people marching to begin with, the basic premise is to save a statue of Robert E Lee. Why do people want Robert E Lee’s statue’s saved, he was a general yes, but what he fought for was slavery. The South fought to continue to have the right to own people. White people think about this, let’s say you were born black during this time, you didn’t have freedom at all, you were owned like a piece of furniture or an animal. Imagine your life, imagine people thinking you are inferior due to the amount of melanin in your skin. This man supported slave owners enough to fight a war to protect this right. This is the man you are looking up to. When statues are put up, it is in honor of something, this person doesn’t deserve this honor, and the statue should be removed. Imagine being black today, walking past a statue celebrating this person, going to a school with the name of a confederate on it, or with a confederate flag flying proudly above it. Would you feel welcome in your own country or state? I hear people defending the confederate flag saying it is southern history, history of treasonous acts toward America and slavery. Why do we have these things on display? When learning about history, this information will still be around, but shouldn’t be celebrated. I don’t understand why this is so hard for people to understand. Do you see people in Germany putting Nazi flags above their schools or naming schools Adolf Hitler Middle? The premise being that the Nazi flag is part of German history and Adolf was a general from our past supporting our rights (same poor logic applied here). Why do you figure they don’t put this on display, because it is history that is frowned upon not celebrated. Second, I feel so ashamed of our country when I think of people in the crowds yelling Nazi chants, holding Nazi flags, wearing Nazi shirts, and making heil Hitler gestures. Do you remember that America fought against the Nazis? How can you be an American while being a Nazi? White men marching about their country being taken from them. EXCUSE ME, I remember this time that Native Americans lived here and we killed them for this land that didn’t belong to us. White people are still the majority and have actually faced no oppression. What are you talking about? I hate to sound cliche, but really CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE. Looking at pictures of the crowds, seeing white men literally up in arms, marching, if that isn’t white privilege I don’t know what is. Imagine for one instant if during Black Lives Matter, 100’s of men had guns, they would have been SHOT and KILLED by the police even if the guns were registered and not being pointed at anyone or being reached for. Native Americans that were protesting the oil pipeline were hit with water cannons by cops. A black person getting pulled over for a basic traffic stop can get murdered at the drop of a hat. Yet you actually are attacking people, holding weapons, and the cops are like “Now Now Everyone Breathe”. People are chanting White Lives Matter, who said they didn’t, when were you oppressed? I challenge anyone reading this post to tell me when the white man was held down. I will save you the time, it doesn’t exist. White men have oppressed people since the beginning, now that the minorities have fairly equal rights white men are bent out of shape. Just because a minority has rights doesn’t mean yours are taken away. Why is this so hard to figure out? But PLEASE tell me more about the oppression you feel. Third, the people stating they have the right to free speech. I agree that is their right, they have the right to assembly as well. I understand that, I also have the right to disagree with the reasoning. You know who also had the right to assemble and that is the counter-protestors. Funny how when you are making a point about hate it’s free speech but when a point about love is made you try to stop it with violence. When I see photos or video of counter protestors being hit with a car, I cry. How could this happen in our country, a country that is supposed to be free? How could Heather Heyer die and so many others be harmed so maliciously? How can this not be labeled an act of terrorism? Fourth, the Nazi blog The Daily Stormer, writes a libelous blog post entitled “Heather Heyer woman killed in road rage incident was a fat childless 32 year old slut”. WTF. There are no words to how atrocious this is. Your piece of shit supporter kills a woman in a crowd protesting your garbage and you ATTEMPT to disgrace her name. How foul a “human being” must you be to think this is “OK”? I love how they put childless in this title. So she was a worthless human being because she wasn’t a barefoot, pregnant slave, CLASSY. Fifth, is the perpetual embarrassment I feel when I see our president. When he is to address this tragedy and he proceeds to say that this is on many sides. NO IT WAS ON YOUR SIDE!!! You say that you are a “no holds barred kinda guy or tell them like it is” this is a domestic act of terrorism, call it as such. This is group of your supporters that committed this heinous crime yet you can’t call it out. After hearing how he is just brushing this under the rug, the neo-nazi groups are celebrating his response. Basically to them it is a stamp of approval for their actions. “Make America Great Again”, boy our country really feels great doesn’t it? Finally I just don’t understand how the Alt-right and the rest of this group states to be so into America, they talk of the constitution and founding fathers. Yet they hold the flags of the enemies of our UNITED states. Do they not look at history books or remember the saying “melting pot”. Our country was founded on that principle. We were never founded to be all White men. If you want to live in a fascist society, go create one somewhere else. If you don’t like the “melting pot” then get the hell out. Sorry for the long rant, just so many different emotions, angry that so many years have gone by and we are apparently regressing. I am also sad that people have this much hate in their hearts that they feel the need to protest the existence/rights of other people. I want to be hopeful but it is difficult in the current climate.