#the general idea extends beyond but these are resources and laws I am familiar with

[cock-holliday]

I’m a pretty grumpy bitter person about The State of Things, but sometimes I get my whole day rocked by the wildly pessimistic assumptions people have. Someone at work firmly believes if you try to render first aid to someone in an emergency, it’s illegal and you will get sued. I talked about Good Samaritan laws protecting aid and actually encouraging bystanders to help and they looked at me like I had 3 heads.

Who told you this? Do you really walk around thinking ‘if I help I will be punished’ and also does that really stop you?

It’s so bleak! Same coworker once talked about visiting a city and being terrified of being mugged everywhere they went. I think about that woman angry about the friendliness of the Italian restaurant owner. I think about those tradwife influencers talking about their security regimen to ensure their suburban fortress will not be violently assaulted by Outsiders.

Like fellas, I am a very pissed off anarchist with an abundance of fury at the state and its actors and I am telling you, even our dogshit legal system sometimes protects the urge to help each other, but even if it didn’t, why does that stop you so definitively?

Please connect with others, please stop seeing strangers as threats instead of other people like you, form bonds with community outside of the nuclear family, and bolster your willingness to break the rules to help.

Bystanders being unwilling to help is a myth. Do something. Render aid, call for help, redirect to resources, look away when people are helping themselves in ways you may not approve—not when they need you there.

[interdisciplinaryart]

Assemble Interview

Date of Recording: 19.06.2019

                                   Assemble Interview Transcript

 I started the interview with Holly who is a founding member of Assemble by introducing myself and talking about what I study and why I thought that an interview with assemble would be useful for my practice.

Interview officially starts: [00:01:42].

Mitchell: How did assemble come to be and what are the difficulties of working across multiple disciplines?

Holly: The majority of us were students at Cambridge University, we had just finished our undergrad and it was in the time of the recession, so sort of 2009 and Jobs were scarce as you remember, and opportunities were scarce so the majority of us moved to London and remained good friends and stayed in touch, there’s about 20 of us. Mostly Architecture students but then a few from, so say Fran is Alice’s cousin, Alice was in my year, Alice studied art well she studied philosophy first at Oxford and then went on to study Art at Leeds and became part of the first project very early on. Also, two other members of the collective Anika who was an English student at Cambridge and her friend, Louie both of them have quite a bit of experience in putting on film festivals and experience with sound systems and so on, so they also became part of the group right at the start. Anyway, we were all kind of in London most of them working on our practice getting our part one experience. Are you familiar sorry with architecture education, are you part 1 part 2, part 3?

Mitchell: Well I study Art and Design, but it is something that I am familiarizing myself with and considering in the future. [00:03:54].

Holly: okay yeah so just a bit of context there, so there are three stages to becoming a qualified architect. Part one is your undergrad, Part two is your diploma and part three is your professional qualification where you sort of basically learn about practice management, professionalism and how not to get sued and so on contract law and all that so part 1 is three years, part 2 is two years and in between those periods of studies you are working in practice to get experience. So, for most of us working in an architectural practice it is getting that experience and we just found that in the time of the recession it was quite negative and didn’t feel as creative as we thought it was going to be and we really missed our architectural education and decided to have a go at a project. We decided basically that we wanted to come up with our own project and we were all working full time in our own practices or elsewhere and we were hunting for a site to find out what that opportunity could be we were meeting in our evenings and weekends whilst working full time so it was all outside of that, the pub, spare bedrooms, and all sorts.

We came across this site in Clerkenwell and we approached the owner of the site and him was supportive of us doing anything that engaged the community because he has since filled the site with a mixed-use development, and it was just an abandoned petrol station that had been decommissioned.

So we thought it was a very interesting pilot project to work with and we very quickly had the idea of wanting to bring the community together and thought the grandeur and romance surrounding cinema-going and the picture palace was a very an interesting area to bring the community together so we did a lot of research into the history of that and we very quickly came up with the idea about enclosing this roof canopy with this large curtain creating the draped seating beneath and putting together a whole weekend of film screenings over a month period and we were working full time so this was all in our spare time and taking some holiday to do it and we all put in a little bit of money each to make it happen. We applied to a company at the time called ideas tap in which we pitched our ideas to and they put 2,500 pounds towards the project.

Beyond that there were a lot of materials that we found or borrowed or people donated to us. Tyvek roofing membrane was provided by a company called dupons because it was quite good advertising for them, good expose and we made this huge winched curtain that we could wince up. We got lots of Formica and we redressed some junior school furniture and overlayed Iconography from the cinema era on top of the furniture. We crossed hatched these textures and made a pattern on some furniture for the forecourt.

This was a temporary project that we did ourselves and it was really we received, we were so lucky it was a complete sell-out and it generated a lot of interest we had so much fun with it that we thought we just have to keep going with this.

That led us to our second project, straight of the back of this we thought we have got to find another opportunity and we soon learnt about a competition that create in London were putting on around the 2012 Olympics, where they were running a competition for 40,000 pounds for the winner. You had to be company to enter so at that point you had to be a company to enter so at that point we registered as assemble. We created a company, we got a business bank account again all of this in our spare time, whilst working full time elsewhere and we entered the competition and put a pitch together, we found this site through love art and architecture because Lewis was working for them at the time and they new of this really cool site in hackney wick under this flyover, this leftover space. an unusual space that was fenced off and public on a main walkway by the canal, but you just couldn’t access it, so it was really odd, it was quite interesting to propose something there and we obviously approached the council as well as a temporary project engaging the community and we won the competition which was fantastic. To quickly summarize the ambition of it we wanted to grow where the synerinyiom had been to cater to a wider audience child through to the elderly and different event so not just screenings but workshop classes, excise classes, musical recitals absolutely all sorts. So, we created this structure that was a raped seating underneath the flyover and then the pitched element was a curious resident that lived there before the flyer over was built and that created an internal space where we had a café. Again, we were so lucky it just completely sold out and so we extended the programme by another two weeks to include more and the money that we generated through ticket sales covered the overall cost of the project which ended up being around 70,000 pounds. From that we had a company and a business account, so we just kept looking for opportunities and we have grown from there now nearly 10 years on the directions that we have gone since are so varied.

We work across the fields of architecture, art and design, we do permanent projects, we do temporary and we are interested in architecture, interior design, product design, furniture design.

Mitchell: Do you think an artist making architecture should be considered an architect? [13:19:27].

Holly : So, my theory on that is to be an architect you do need to study architecture, that’s not to limit but if you are an artist that is interested in architecture you can absolutely become engaged in those projects. The key is collaborating and that is something that we absolutely love to do most of our projects involve collaboration of some sort with others.

So, we work with many artists and are interested in meeting new artists to learn from others, ceramicists, illustrators absolutely all sorts. So, I think the key to that question is collaboration finding the people you are interested in working with and making something happen. You can realise what ever it is you want by collaborating. But to deliver architectural projects you do need architectural training.

What works well about our collective is that we have such a mix of skills in house, so we are all bringing different things and learning from one another, we all have different interests sometimes that can be quite unruly and quite difficult to mange as a company but it is also one of our greatest strengths because we have this pool of resources, learning and experience and we can pull from one another.

Mitchell: Would you say that it is important for artists/ practitioners to push their boundaries and develop skills outside their normal disciplines? [15:18:05].

Holly: My personal feeling on that is it completely depends on the individual I don’t think it’s essential. It depends on what your interests are or what one’s interests are. Myself personally and speaking on behalf of the rest of the group I’d say that we are all of a similar mind set where we are so interested in learning and expanding on experience that we are all questioning all the time and we wouldn’t be intimidated about not knowing a  certain field of something we would  try to find who does know that. Who is interested in that field and find out if they are interested in working together or collaborating? Hats from experience the best way to go about these things but it doesn’t mean that everyone should do that.

Mitchell: Would you say that there is a need for more inter-disciplinary collectives within the creative industry? [16:22:06].

Holly: Again I think it totally depends on ones practice or whatever one is looking to do, I really think that as long as you and when I say you I mean one whoever that person is, that company or whatever they believe in what they are contributing to the world in whatever form that is and contributing to their own life. It’s not essential but I personally think it leads to richness in new avenues and new opportunities. So personally, for me yes but it is not essential for everybody.

Mitchell: What are the difficulties of constructing a self-built project? Like the Four Corners project for example. [17:15:00].

So it’s important for me to set up the context a little bit more for that, so that whole set of work which we have incrementally been involved in each year is all because of an extortionary group of residents the existing community that is there and they have been fighting for their community for twenty plus years they are absolutely extraordinary people and very resilient, they approached us after they became a CLT (Community land trust) they approached us to see if we would get involved because they had bought through different streams of funding bought 10 of the houses on the street. They wanted creative ideas for there refurbishments.

So, they approached us to see if we were interested and that is how we got involved and from that it has grown to include the Granbury winter garden and Granbury workout which was integral with the ten houses and that was what the whole turner prize project was around.

 I’m at the minute involved in the next piece of the jigsaw which is for a new three-story domestic building, that’s a new build where it’s going to have a community café, ground floor and two residential flats above.

We have got ideas about developing the cladding with Granby workshop and the whole community can be involved in making the cladding for this new building.

Mitchell: Do you think it’s important for communities to have more access to knowledge about building and architecture? [20:07:11]

Holly: Absolutely I think that’s a really good question, that is something that we look to do with all of our projects to break down those usual barriers that make it hard for people to relate to the construction industry, the understanding of how projects are realised and what’s possible.

With every project we approach the detail of that project basis, we wouldn’t have a kind of set oh this is how we can approach this, what is in the projects best interest? the brief is this that they have given to us but here’s the opportunity this is really what’s going to enrich this project and this community. How we can really engage with however the particular group or the locals. Absolutely upskilling and trying to find the opportunities to deliver the best that’s possible. We are also interested in education of all backgrounds, ages and there are various different projects where the workshop upskilled the locals and gave some of them paid employment in the production of materials that then went into the houses the sale of which went back into the model to help the renovations. So, it’s a cycle/ system.

Also, another project on that basis which you might be interested in is black horse workshop in Wollen stone London and this has been quite pioneering as a project, working with the council and it delivers facilities, you can become engaged in black horse workshop in a number of ways everything from just going to the café which is a popular place for brunch, to going for classes where you can learn how to make a table and other pieces of furniture, to being a member where you have access to workshop facilities and specialty skills on site, or to be able to rent studio space.

It’s a complete variation of different packages that you can be involved in at different scales and it’s hugely popular and there is a feeling that most councils /boroughs would love this everyone is wanting a black horse workshop. It’s great in upskilling people and offering different ways that people can engage and get involved.

Mitchell: How does assemble choose what projects they take on? [23:13:11].

Holly: Our process is very democratic we have two people who are responsible for going through all the opportunities that come via email. We look through all the material, we might need top go back and ask some more questions so that we can properly interrogate that opportunity and then we put it all together in a digest. Every week the whole group comes together to sit down and review in a meeting those opportunities and discuss alongside our resources, how much time we have available will we do the project justice. Is it in our interest or is their someone else that we could recommend that is more appropriate and we go through them all together, everyone has a chance to pitch a project if they really want to work on it and then it comes down to how busy are you, is that really feasible and maybe other need to be working on it in a group. That goes back to that earlier question about that shared skill set sometimes a project is resourced with different skill sets in the group to deliver it. Myself bringing more of an architectural perspective, then say Fran or Anika bringing a more strategic early stage conceptual vision to the project. I hope that answers the question.

Mitchell: Where do you see assemble being in the next ten years? [24:58:10].

 Holly : It isn’t easy being so many of us there are eighteen of us a the minute and for the first time we have taken on employees, we’ve got three employees who are fantastic, but I’m sure you can appreciate that as soon as you take on employees you have got obligations that you are stature in terms of their pay and their wellbeing.

We try to make sure that we are meeting those things for ourselves personally but we are running our own business and that’s a constant balance that we can properly pay people and deliver all of those things That’s a work in progress, a challenge that we are constantly trying to better our selves at and we are constantly reflecting on, reviewing and improving on.

So, I’d like to say ten years from now we will have improved on lots of those things which every company is faced with these challenges, but we are actively trying to better ourselves all the time.

I think also within the next ten years, I would like to say that we have taken on more large-scale architectural projects like our project Goldsmiths (Goldsmiths centre for contemporary arts) that was our largest commission so far and we have already started work on a few other large-scale projects that we are excited about.

We are not able to share them yet, but we are hoping to build on that. I think that we would like to grow as a practice to become a robust model that can grow slightly to accommodate more people more expertise and more skills that would be fantastic.

Mitchell: Have you guys completed the level three education in architecture? [27:06:04].

Holly: Yeah so, I have and there are another four that are about to qualify for part three but at the moment it is just myself.

Mitchell: Had any of you qualified at the time of assembles conception? [27:30:06].

No that’s like I was saying on the first project we were all part one student working full time elsewhere, so no a real mix. A lot of us being in the architectural profession had a lot of friends that were at different stages that we went to for advice along the way and I would say that very early on if anything we were following professional guidelines from a very early stage just to make sure that we had the right insurance in place and we were doing everything by the book. We have probably been adopting those principles earlier than most students.

 End Of Interview.

[thesecondsealwrites]

Important Signs Of A Dead End Relationship To Look Out For

Sometimes, what began as a passionate and happy union becomes something dull, frustrating or even deeply unhappy. If this sounds familiar to you, then you might be asking yourself “Am I in a dead-end relationship, or can we find a way to make this relationship work?”. While the end of a relationship is almost always painful and daunting, sometimes the only way you can thrive is to move on. But how do you know when you're just going through a rough patch and when you'd genuinely be better off apart?

This guide will look at how to know when a relationship isn’t working and has reached a place where it is simply beyond repair. We'll explore the thoughts, feeling, and experiences that are commonly experienced when a breakup is imminent, and consider some of the self-reflective questions you need to ask yourself in order to come to the right decision.

7 Signs Of A Dead End Relationship

Unfortunately, there is no foolproof test that can tell you whether you should separate. However, there are certain patterns found in almost all dead-end relationships, and becoming more aware of them can open your eyes to the truth of your current circumstances.

Here are the most common signs you are in a dead end relationship. A single sign should be viewed as a wakeup call, telling you that your dynamic needs to be adjusted if you're going to be happy.

For example, maybe you need to communicate more directly or consider seeing a couple counselor. However, the more signs you recognize, the more likely it is that you haven’t yet found the right person for you. In addition, the longer you've been seeing these symptoms of a dead-end relationship, the less plausible it is that dramatic change will occur.

1. You’re Bored

A massive warning sign that your relationship is over is that your partner just doesn’t excite you anymore. In other words, you don't look forward to talking to them, you relish the idea of time spent away from them, and you find them predictable.

This often extends to the physical realm too, where your partner's kisses might leave you cold and you may find yourself making excuses to avoid intimacy. Of course, relationships do become less explosive and more comfortable over time, but if you're with someone who makes you feel uninspired and glum, this person isn't the one for you.

2. You're Trying To “Fix” Your Partner

One of the most glaring dead-end relationship signs is that you're with someone who is more of a project than a partner.

Do you view this person as someone who is so riddled with flaws that you have to change their fundamental nature?

No one is perfect, but if you're trying to remake your partner from the ground up then you aren't being fair to them or to yourself. You deserve to be with someone who you like and accept for who they really are, and your partner deserves someone who is able to offer that kind of acceptance to them.

(If you are ready to move on from your current relationship, do not fear… No, you are not “destined to always be alone”! Try downloading the brand new Love Tool Kit… It could help you not only figure out what you want in a dream partner but could also help you manifest this ideal relationship, using key creative visualization tools and techniques! With worksheets, printables and expert guides, this is a great resource to have. Click here now to get your access.)

3. You Don't Trust Your Partner

Trust is a tricky issue. Perhaps you were wounded in the past, or perhaps you're struggling to get over a previous breach of trust in your current relationship. It is possible to build and restore trust, so if you have difficulties in this area then it's not a death sentence to your relationship.

On the other hand, if you've tried and failed to trust your partner, or they're repeatedly proving that they don't deserve your trust, then you would likely be happier apart. While there may be small doubts in even the happiest relationship, a catastrophic lack of trust always erodes love in the end.

4. You Don’t Feel Like You Can Be “Completely Yourself” With This Person

Anger and resentment in relationships often derive from a sense of being stifled or limited in some way.

Whether your partner has tried to get you to change or you're just not confident that they'd like the “real you”, being inauthentic is a recipe for disaster. In the right relationship, you'll be with someone who feels like a best friend; someone who delights in your quirks and understands your personality. They should encourage you to be fully yourself.

Without this feeling, your self-esteem will plummet and you'll be unlikely to reach your full potential (not only in romance but also in your career, and life more generally).

5. Your Life Goals Aren’t The Same

Compared to the other unhappy relationship signs, this one is subtler. After all, there's never going to be a total overlap between your goals and your partner's, and there will be inevitable negotiations about issues like work-life balance.

The real problem sign is if you and your other half disagree on substantive things like whether to have children, where to live, whether to be monogamous and so on. When there's such a fundamental mismatch in your ideas of a happy and fulfilled life, one or both of you is bound to end up bitter in the end.

If this is a major issue and you now want to move forward, it's best to make these goals clear at the beginning of a new relationship. A great tool for this is a relationship self-evaluation.

Alternatively, designing your dream partner can make it crystal clear what you are looking for long term. You can get both of these tools in our official Love Tool Kit!

Just click here now to find out more and to get access to your toolkit.

6. You Always Make The Effort

When asking yourself “Is my relationship dead?”, make sure you consider the balance of power between you and your partner. In particular, if you're always the one suggesting dates, trying to look nice, instigating sex or planning ways to improve the relationship, this suggests that your partner isn't willing to make the effort required to keep the dynamic fresh and satisfying.

In some cases, this can be resolved with a simple conversation and an agreement to work to rebalance things, but in other cases, you'll discover that your partner just doesn't have the energy or commitment to do what's needed.

7. You Can Think Of More Bad Things Than Good Things

Finally, one of the most obvious signs of a dead-end relationship is that the cons dramatically outweigh the pros. If it's easy for you to come up with twenty reasons why your partner makes you angry, miserable or bored and yet you can't come up with even five reasons why you love this person, it's obvious why you should conclude. The relationship is no longer meeting your needs.

In less obvious cases, try writing down a real pros and cons list to help yourself gain some perspective on what you're really getting out of this relationship and what is fundamentally lacking.

The post Important Signs Of A Dead End Relationship To Look Out For appeared first on The Law Of Attraction.

from The Law Of Attraction https://ift.tt/2oPb1a4 via LifeChange.site

[blackacidlizzard]

The Conquest Question

Call it colonialism, call it imperialism, or call it conquest.

Is it proper for the coming ethnostate to seek its advantage over alien peoples, over foreign nations in separate lands?

This is nowhere near the most hotly contested question among the consciously White, but it may be the most serious issue of contention.

Let us first kick into the ashcan the idea that we should stand for the rights of all peoples to their own ethnic homelands. While many who say this are surely giving mere lip service to sell our own call for independence and mastery of our own tomorrow, empty rhetoric often embeds itself in the minds of a nation and leads to destructive ends - simply consider how many insist that "all men are created equal" with no care for the context of those words, the beliefs of the man who wrote them, or even the laws devised by those who fought under that banner.

To hold "nations for all" as an ideal is first to suggest a paradox - that we will fight to determine the shape of alien societies - but more importantly it is to imply that it is proper for us to fight for the benefit of alien peoples. Does that sound familiar? It should - this has been the premise of Western governments for our entire lives.

We must reject, with certainty, the notion of fighting for the well-being of non-Whites. Sacrificing our kin upon the altar of racial altruism should be recognized as treasonous and all moral claims implying such duties must likewise be opposed.

But what of simple dedication to non-interference? The vision of future White nations keeping to ourselves and allowing the rest of the world to sort out their politics, cultures, and territorial claims on their own is very seductive to myself and many others in the pro-White community.

Why is this such a popular idea among even we who stand without shame and say that our interests are more important than the interests of the alien? A case could be made that this is the hangover from our upbringing, the cultural assumptions of White guilt and treat your racial adversaries equally, that we have only partially come to be who we are and we stand now in a psychological compromise between abnegation and mastery, and this argument almost certainly has some truth - for many of us the first step out of the self-abasement of mainstream ideology was "allow me to stop paying for shitty unproductive thugs to breed - but I'm not a racist," and it could be seen as a second step, closer to the light of unadulterated self-and-racial-interest yet still shaded by branches of psychological habit to say "let us unify along racial lines and expel the alien, but we won't dominate them."

But I submit there is a deeper reason that so many of us want that world of universalist internationalist nationalism. A reason crudely stated, but more precisely true than superficial notions of memetic conditioning. The reason that explains why we are susceptible to the memetic conditioning in the first place. It is because we are White.

It is well known in libertarian and alt-right circles alike that Libertarianism is a White thing. Any poll examining libertarian ethnic identity always comes out around 90% White and 9% Jewish - and we know which Jews those tend to be. When was the last time you saw a Sephardi libertarian? Libertarianism, an ideology centered around personal responsibility, reciprocity and the right of the individual to be unchained from a host of traditional obligations, is a White thing. We endorse universalist nationalism for the same reason that so many of us were libertarians: because we are White.

The psychological archetype of the libertarian is a White archetype. It is not, however, *the* White archetype. These pre-linguistic desires are dominant in the minds of only a minority even of Whites. The notion that all men, or even all White men, naturally want the "freedom" to determine their own path and would not desire domination of innocent others for their personal gain or personal whims is simple projection by people unwilling to accept that they are oddities and oblivious to the drives and desires of those around them. Most Whites desire, at their very core, an active unchallengeable authority, be it a man or an institution. Not all men are born to be philosophers, much less existentialists.

But still, these proto-libertarian psychic drivers find some space of resonance within the wider White culture. Gifted men have been able to plant memetic seeds that found a bit of foothold in the typical White mind, receptive to degrees and variants of the proposition that man should be free to prosper and free to fail. I refer you to the mythos of the United States of America. It's all a spectrum, much like the spectrum so many libertarians are on.

The reciprocal ethos of 'hands off' has worked well within many White societies. There are arguments made that these White societies would be better if they held to this ethos more consistently. But even if these arguments are accurate, they do not apply to intra-societal matters.

Regardless of how any civilization has functioned internally, it seems that no society, no nation, has maintained and prospered with reciprocal non-interference. The reality of every civilization seems to be always in constant movement along the spectrum of dominance and submission. A growing power repelling active invaders, a growing power subjugating by invasion, a receding power pulling back from conquered territory, or a receding power subjugated to the power of invaders.

We are of course now at that fourth stage, and may, for simple reasons of survival, need to transition to the first. But long-term, history suggests that this is simply not sustainable. Once we have become free of the alien hordes, dynamism does not stop. It may be a simple fact that those who do not expand are expanded upon. Look to China. How long before simple refusal to preempt their designs seals our destruction?

That is the empirical case. Now for the question of value.

What is the value of animals who will never harness the power beneath their feet being left to occupy the land and block the resources from being used in service of a historically unprecedented good? We have built cities beyond the imagination of the poets of a mere 100 generations ago. What we can do in another 20, 80, or 800 generations - is that worth less than another million years of mud huts in Africa? We can extend the life of the human species - and the best part of the human species - beyond the next cataclysm. If the have the will. Is that worth less than letting Dindu-Bongo continue his simian rape-culture unmolested by us?

And now for the reciprocal case. Even a core moral presupposition for the non-interference party can be turned back upon them.

We have been the sole race that has, when in full power, freed the alien to our own material disadvantage. We have educated the negro, enriched the Arab, and pushed the yellow man into our age of technological marvel. And from every one of our benefactees, we have only gotten more pushback. We grow the negro population so that they can more easily slaughter us. We enrich the Arabs so that they can organize stronger troops against us, and we all know what will happen if China reaches per-capita military might with us. No non-White people make it a secret that we are targets. This is what our spreading of our wealth has brought us. They repay beneficence with hostility. When you think that we should treat them as separate entities worthy of respect, worthy at least of the right to live free of our coercion, remember that only we think that way.

I am not suggesting that every White man need to become a master-morality Sherman, stomping on the weak. All civilizations are multi-moral to an extent, and perhaps White civilization is that which most must be multi-moral, for the brutality of the negro works on all levels, the rapacity of the Arab works on all levels, the conniving of the chinaman works on all levels, but the cooperativeness and mutual respect natural to the masses of Whites does not work on the most macro of levels. It is good for the common White man to hold principles akin to the Golden Rule and the NAP - but it may be suicidal for White civilizations to hold to the same. All things to their proper pace. All moralities to their proper scale.

I speak not to the common White man, who has no problem compartmentalizing his own morality from the morality of the state, I only speak to the White men interested in shaping the morality of the coming authority. Can you look your child in the eye and tell him that the children of congolese savages are more important to you than his own great-great-great-great-grandchildren?

x