Taboo & the Power of the Mind

As I've been taking or started the processes of taking real, direct action, it's become much more clear to me how much of our world exists mostly in what we've been taught, as social constructs, some reified enough that they become something you don't even question any more, accepted as fact. Material conditions aside, which are prerequisites for all things in life, many options available to you are ones you write off initially as being unfeasible, unacceptable or, according to some, illegal. These, all, to differing degrees are social constructions which you can deconstruct. & once you do, a world of untapped potential opens up!

To take a simple example, there are those who rescue goods rejected by whatever corporation or service distributes them, out-of-date food & the like. They realise that the expiry date written on any product's packaging itself is also a social construct, one not to be taken at face value given those who put it on there. Yes, bacteria & mould are real dangers, but those don't care for the date on the packaging, they'd be there 10 minutes before it went overdate if they'd be there when it does. The expiry date, ultimately, is just a suggestion as to when it stops being in service of the profit motive to sell product. This is but one of the manifestations of what deconstructing what you've been taught can take.

The same goes, though in a different way, for legality. It's a human construct that only takes shape when observed by one who deems it illegal, like the police or a particularly rule-following citizen. As such it really is as young children say: It's not illegal if you don't get caught. My overarching point is, so long as you don't have self-imposed unreasonable standards & are willing to disregard what a normative society has taught you, you can make a much bigger tangible difference than you may realise. Not to sound too bootstraps-ey, again, if your material conditions, whatever form they may take, don't permit you, that's 100% valid, but if life permits you, you kind of just have to get out there & do it!

Why did I get like 10 seemingly legit followers suddenly. I don’t even post much. Help 😭

This works, I think

Fun picrew game to try! I tried remaking myself as accurate as possible was fun

No pressure tags 💓: @witheredoffherwitch @hieronymph @multifandotakugirl @otaku-chanx @luckytoucan @nyaerys @maidragoste @liv-cole @donaemondtargaryen @smaugbornassassin @lynnbeth5172 @um-weird-flex-but-ok @aemondsdragon @richardsthirdnipple @drunkchickpea @boundlessfantasy @zae5 @snowblack-charcoalwhite @madame-fear @barbiedragon @fearthhereaper @qyburnsghost

These elections were a disaster! I think I'm gonna go flee to a cave, Belgium, or a cave in Belgium.

Leftist Musical Analysis: Rainbow Drones - Dog Park Dissidents

Rainbow Drones by Dog Park Dissidents is a song, at its core, about the dangers of respectability politics & moderatism at large. It's a song about the risk ran when dropping any resistance so soon as a modicum of respect & equality has been afforded to you. About how relenting once the needs of a specific part of your marginalisation have been met is ineffective & immoral

It specifically speaks on how the fight for queer equality has lead to us, too, becoming part of the imperialist power that is the US. In our enfranchisement, we, too, have become a tool in the government's pocket to beat down & oppress others with. Legal inequality is an issue, sure, but if the equality you are fighting for is the ability to shoot government-assigned undesirables, there, clearly, is an underlying issue.

Rainbow Drones is a cautionary tale: If you do not take an intersectional approach to liberation, you may be fighting only for equality within a corrupt system. Your fight may only lead to finding your place in an oppressive power structure, instead of dismantling it. It's a song about the tragedy in fighting to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell without further questioning of the military as an institution, therein accepting the presupposed terms which state the military is valuable & necessary. In fighting for equality & not justice, the mistake is made of accepting the terms the status quo poses.

In the words of maia arson crimew- Though this goes for all fights for liberation, not just feminism- "Your feminism is either intersectional or nonexistent."

I think there's an inherent dichotomy I experience between the romance & (for lack of a non-dramatic word) tragedy of being a socialist.

Seeing how much more this world & its people could be makes it almost impossible to accept the inefficient & cruel world we live in & I think that has a certain melancholia. Part of the beauty of the world we live in, an unchanged one, is for me, forever tainted. I don't think it's at all apt to conclude ignorance is bliss, though. Ignorance is, to me, just disappointment you're saving for later, but being conscious of the many what-ifs & could-bes makes the fact we live in this specific world sting a bit. I truly wish things could be different, I truly wish neither I nor anyone else had to worry about the future, but we do & I don't think that'll change anytime soon, maybe not ever. But, again, I do think there's a certain romanticism to it. The people I have the greatest amount of respect for are, without exception, always the people who fought for change in their time, which is what I am trying to do now & I think that is freaking radical.

I suppose I hate that I have to be radical, but love being radical. Feelings are contradictory like that sometimes.

the "voting does nothing"/"voting isn't harm reduction"/"if you vote you're an idiot liberal"/"they're both the same" crowd that exists in progressive areas of so many western democracies really is so unbelievably privileged. so many people globally do not have this right and yet people treat it like it's nothing.

literally like i don’t think ppl who don’t take voting seriously realize how difficult it is for a lot of ppl (poor ppl and poc in particular) to vote. i live in a low income and primarily black neighborhood and the hoops we have to jump through just to figure out where the fucking polling place is just for them to change it the morning of election day with no notice is insane. voting isn’t gonna magically get rid of fascism, but keeping fascists out of power in whatever way you can will help slow it down.

There is little which frustrates me more than the sentiment that Western hegemony is, at all, a good thing. The assumption which follows all too often when I express this is that I would like or support the hegemony of some other culture, past or present, like Russia, the USSR or China.

I cannot say I do not have my critiques of all of these societies, some more than others, but I also cannot say that I do not have my critiques of the West. The thing I take issue with which is, currently, unique to the West is that it exists largely without blatant outside threats, there is currently no other world power truly keeping it in check.

If we go back to the '80s, the USSR did in many ways compete with the West. There was an alternative to Western (often US) collaboration, which I don't think exists any longer unless a country is powerful & resource-rich enough to be self-sufficient. You will participate in the free market, whether you want to or not.

Another problem this causes besides the lack of freedom & choice is the erosion of workers' rights. With no major, living, breathing example of anything but Western capitalism, all smaller examples being suppressed, the palpable reality of the possibility of change is all too easily erased.

This is among the reason I believe Western hegemony is, directly or indirectly, a cause of a lot of exploitation & how inescapable it has become. Furthermore, I think Western capitalist hegemony is a large part of why meaningful choices & freedoms are becoming rarer & rarer to come by. Capitalism & freedom are antithetical & with nothing fighting back against capitalism (regardless of the merits or demerits of said force) it is allowed to run rampant.

I find it horrifying & frankly dystopian how money has become the de facto way to quantify impact on the world. I saw a YouTube video recently which detailed research into sustainable alternatives for pesticides in the cattle industry & the conclusion had nought to do with its positive environmental impact nor how it might affect the quality of life for livestock, instead it was about how much extra profit the American cattle industry might stand to make per year.

There are many more examples of this, when trying to conceptualise success, for example, many peoples' minds (including, in the past, mine) immediately jump to wealth & ignore mostly everything else, despite the fact that purely wealth is obviously an imperfect metric. If you go off of only wealth, no celebrity would really ever have a reason to commit suicide, but as we all understand money does not make one immune to harassment, mental illness or any other number of factors which might push one to the brink. Still, I don't think many “30 under 30” style lists include any such factors & our personal conceptions of success all too often don't either.

I think, though, on some level money can be a way to quantify impact on the world, not because money is a good quantifier, but because under a downright oppressive capitalist system there is little (though not nothing) which gives you more influence or sway than money does. To make any systemic changes from inside of the system, you require capital & there is no way around that fact.

All of this, to me, is just another thing which symbolises how capitalist social conditioning is ultimately harmful to humans & discourages genuine intellectual discussion. We barely know how to make sense of the world & capitalistic socialisation gives us an easy out by quantifying nigh everything with something we have all been taught to understand & accept blindly since birth: money.

The recent rise of AI “art” has made me realise something which is pretty integral to the way I personally experience art & that is that I think art without an artist is no art at all, for pretty pictures or drawings does not art make.

I would personally define art as unconventional ways to express thoughts & feelings & most importantly of all, self-expression. & if there's no self to express, you simply cannot live up to my definition of art.

Importantly, then, I also things we wouldn't conventionally consider art should count, too: Talking, cooking & sewing are to me, for example, all forms of art. & to me, the truer the art is to the artist, the better. I suppose that might be another reason why I feel so iffy about capitalist art, the profit motive disturbs that somewhat.

"But look at what happens in socialist countries."

I literally don't care. No one's saying to elect people who call themselves socialist and let them do whatever they want. No one's saying to find a socialist country and copy their policies exactly.

Also, when bad things happen in the United States, you blame socialism for that too.

As someone recently diagnosed with ADHD as an adult, one thing that’s been helping me grapple with the intense shame I have over all my “wasted potential” is accepting that potential doesn’t exist and never did.

This sounds so harsh, but please bare with me.

I procrastinated a lot growing up. I still procrastinate today, but less so. And yet, I got good grades. I could write an A+ paper that “knocked [my professor]’s socks off” in the hour before class and print it with sweat running down my face.

I was so used to hearing from teachers and family that if I just didn’t procrastinate and worked all the time, I could do anything! I had all this potential I wasn’t living up to!

And that’s true, as far as it goes, but that’s like saying if Usain Bolt just kept going he could be the fastest marathon runner in the world. Why does he stop at the end of the race??

If ANYONE could make their top speed/most productive setting the one they used all the time, anyone could do anything. But you can’t. Your top speed is not a speed you’re able to sustain.

Now, I’ve found that I do need to work on not procrastinating. Not because the product is better, even, but because it’s better for my mental health and physical health to not have a full, sweating, panicked breakdown over every task even if the task itself turns out excellently. It’s a shitty way to live! You feel bad ALL the time! And I don’t deserve to live like that anymore.

So all of this to say, I’m not wasting a ton of potential. I don’t have an ocean of productivity and accomplishments inside of me that I could easily, effortlessly access if I just sat down 8 hours a day and worked. There’s no fucking way. That’s not real. It’s an illusion. It’s fine not to live up to an illusion.

And if you have ADHD, I mean this from the bottom of my heart: you do not have limitless potential confounded by your laziness. You have the good potential of a good person, and you can access it with practice and work, but do not accept the story that you are choosing not to be all that you are or can be. You are just a human person.

Leftist Musical Analysis: Love in the Time of Socialism - Yellow House Love in the Time of Socialism, to me, embodies the very personal feelings I hold towards Marxism & how good it feels, in general, to embrace leftist politics.

Like, how many capitalist love songs are there? I'm sure there are some, but probably not nearly as many as Marxist ones & I think that's because what both ideologies are ultimately founded on differs greatly.

Marxism is compassionate & kind (ideologically speaking, if nothing else) while capitalism & its practical realities we experience is cold & apathetic. & I'm sure this is bound to change if Marxism became an actuality & not just theory for me, I'm sure I romanticise Marxism an unrealistic amount, but, well, cold, apathy generally doesn't make a good love song & compassionate kindness does. In any case, I think the song also embodies freedom Marxism encourages. It wonders about a lot of "What if?"s, about who you want to be, who you could be &, ultimately, who you should be. To me this is another great benefit Marxist systems would have, just having the ability to slow down & figure yourself out seems really valuable to me. Humans are malleable creatures & I feel it'd be wise to take advantage of that. In any case, it's just a really good song & gets me hella in my feels, go listen to it <3

Leftist Musical Analysis: Dirty Pennies - Mischief Brew Dirty Pennies by Mischief Brew is, genuinely, one of the best portrayals of police & leftist thought on police/policing in (musical) media I've come across. It tells the story of an old, unhoused woman & a small-town boy who grows up to become a cop. It paints a picture of who the young boy was; he brought the old woman hot tea & whatever food was left over, as well as dirty pennies he found on the street, which makes it clear the boy is very empathetic & cares deeply for the old woman. He is generally just a good, kind person. Then, the song details how the boy was indoctrinated by, put bluntly, anti-poor propaganda ("But the boy went on to be taught in the schools, to not talk to strangers and don't feed the fools,") & how he became a police officer. Furthermore, it goes on to set your expectations, from the old woman's perspective, that such an empathetic person being an officer of law would obviously be good. Because it would be good in a system that functioned properly.

The song, however, doesn't play coy for long, as it's revealed just as soon that there is very little left of the empathetic, young boy; he'd become nought more than a soldier & defender of the status quo, who is thus just as bigoted & awful as said status quo. Because as much as cops suck, one of the very few things that suck more is the policing system, it very obviously & blatantly grooms & traumatises people into getting into a state of mind where you can ignore literal human rights abuses & actively participate in enforcing a bigoted & awful status quo. (By this I am not excusing cops, fuck cops, ACAB, but it's obvious without such an abhorrent system the problem wouldn't be as bad as it is.)

The song ends with the old woman reminding the police officer of who he used to be & who he still is, deep down ("They buried something inside of you, Officer, into your cold heart dig deep") & as the cop recalls his past, recalls who he used to be, he regains a little, just a little, of his humanity. I think the portrayal of police here is so great because it is unabashedly anti-cop, doesn't play at anything else & doesn't excuse the cop, while still showing his humanity. Because I think it's important (Ideologically, not emotionally, I don't think you can & I won't blame anyone affected by how shitty cops are for loathing & hating them. I think if I was in a less privileged position I probably would.) to realise cops are still people. All too often horrible, broken people, but people nonetheless, some (hopefully most) of which can, thus, hopefully be rehabilitated.

ACAB, 1312

I'm sorry if I came off as rude I'm also autistic and communicating tone is hard for me, I completely understand not being aware of normalized terms with bad history. We sadly all do it but thank you for changing it and I hope you have a wonderful day again sorry if I came off as rude :3

No worries, dude! It didn't come off as rude & even if it did, well, I think addressing underlying bigotry is more important than the feelings of someone who did something that's in some way bigoted, so, y'know. Anyway, thank you for pointing it out! We all still have a lot to learn, here's to hoping we learn sooner rather than later.

I think in some ways cars are problematic & a symptom of how hyper-individual & ultimately exploitative western society can be. In the US, estimated population 331 million, estimated number of households 123 million, there are 290 million cars. That's 2.3 cars per household or 0.87 cars per person. It feels, to me, like having a car for yourself is a sort of milestone of success & independence. it's portrayed like everyone should aspire to have a car, but if you'd extend that standard to the degree present in the US, it'd be clear just how unfeasible this is.

Take China, estimated population 1.4 billion, estimated number of households 474 million, yet only around 302 million cars. So, around 0.6 cars per household & 0.2 cars per person. If you'd extrapolate from US standards, China would have around 1.2 billion, with a b, cars going off the rates in the US per person or around 1 billion cars going off the the rates in the US per household.

This would pose obvious problems, cars at current are in ways already problematic for the environment, but if you'd apply US standards to the rest of the world- Remember, I just calculated China, there's still India, Russia & the entire rest of the world- it'd be wholly & utterly devastating. Of course, I'm not blaming the average car owner, in the US public infrastructure is shit & public transport is horrible, but what I'm trying to say is that how we think of & use cars is founded on global inequality. So, along with a range of local logistical problems (cars just being plain inefficient) thinking we can or should strive to sustain the usage of cars as it is now is bad. Anyway, some of my maths may be off, I'm not great at maths, but you get the point. What I'm saying is that while cars may have some utility & I think there are legitimate applications of them, them being owned by individuals & used by just those individuals isn't that legitimate application. I think the solution lies, as it often does, in a form of collectivism.