The migrant crisis in Latin America is the consequences of the Capitalist Modernity

Those people that are fleeing their land at thousands, if not millions, are met with the military and oppressive apparatus of the “first-world”, the “north-world”, European countries letting people die in the seas of the Mediterranean sea so they don’t get to the borders of the south Europe or the concentration camps in the Mexico-US border where agents of ICE and the United States Border Patrol behave as Gestapo agents by leaving people without food or any human care as they are caged – even children are separated from their families. This happens due to the eugenicist mentality of this countries, their white policies that had origin in the colonisation and the bases of the creation of the nation-state mentality.

Rojava, Maxmûr & Chiapas: Οικοδόμηση και υπεράσπιση μιας εναλλακτικής επιλογής στην καπιταλιστική νεωτερικότητα

Source: Rojava, Maxmûr & Chiapas: Building and Defending an Alternative to Capitalist Modernity – INTERNATIONALIST COMMUNE Rojava, Maxmûr & Chiapas: Οικοδόμηση και υπεράσπιση μιας εναλλακτικήςεπιλογής στην καπιταλιστική νεωτερικότητα By InternationalistCommune / June 20, 2023 Οι Ζαπατίστας από την αυτόνομη περιοχή της Τσιάπας έχουν αναφέρειαυξανόμενη παρουσία στρατιωτικών, αστυνομικών,…

View On WordPress

In Time (2011) Love for Love’s Sake (2024)

i keep thinking back to a quote by some architect who was arguing that the most sustainable architecture is the architecture that doesnt get torn down bc we will be (hopefully) constantly finding newer, cheaper, more efficient, ways of being "sustainable" so trying to make the most sustainable building is a moot point. in 5 years it will be outdated & if all it has going for it is "was once a very sustainable building but isnt anymore" well. that isnt much. the point was that the architect was saying that classical/romantic architecture (often considered very beautiful & worth saving which i could get into but that a whole other thing) is sustainable bc of its beauty. bc of the value we put on it. bc we dont want to erase or tear down things we find beautiful or important. i dont really have an end thought but im just musing on the importance of beauty & how aesthetic value can extend itself into material value & also how beauty (infinite) is hoarded by the rich as if it is a finite source. inch resting

"Playing god" isn't actually a thing, creating dinosaurs in the first place isn't the real problem with the Jurassic Park parks. It was the gross mismanagement and animal neglect. It could have been done if anyone with actual ethics and half a braincell was involved

We have GOT to start sexualizing neckties. They're like leashes for butches

Modern aus are a lot of fun and i do understand the narrative signifcance of power and class in mdzs and to preserve characterization you may find the need to replicate that in a modern story but please stop making Nie Mingjue a ceo. Why would you do that to him? Stop taking him out of his natural habitat (in the forest chopping wood with his shirt off) the office environment does NOT provide him with enough enrichment!

not to overstate things but truly my vilain origin story is the number of people who seem to think that 'what are useful ways to interact with visual art' is not a complex conversation that's lasted for centuries

I find it kind of silly that so many of those "time based life rule" sayings are like ~deep serious guidelines~ of some sort, but then there's that one other Well Known Rule that's just like "hrmm can I eat something off of the ground or not"

also also I know everyone likes to talk about how good of an archon Venti is because he left mondstadt to do its own thing and hey look Zhongli's doing the same now with his retirement but I also like how the story shows it isn't without flaws, with so much freedom in the city it's all too easy to take control with power, Mondstadt's people may be free but they also don't have a god to actually uphold the ideal they stand for and how personal freedoms conflict, discrimination(eg. against Eula and her clan) is allowed because the people are free to do whatever they want, the fatui really wormed their way into mondstadt during the webtoon + nearly did with Davalin bc the people of mondstadt do whatever they want so Jean is overworked and the knights are ineffective(according to Diluc), and how mondstadt might have been the least free place for the common people during the Lawrences rule despite being the region governed by the archon of freedom

Zhongli at least first tested his people were ready before retiring, Venti kinda acended, organized a bunch of celebrations for his people, then left them to have fun with their newfound freedom only interveining when things get really bad

It’s 2024 and we’ve got plenty of experimental flying taxi companies for rich people to invest in but nobody has bothered to make a small scale air conditioner that doesn’t immediately produce toxic levels of mold. Build a freaking UV light into the darn things I dunno. Try!

cannot get over how dumb the "education is training you to be a mindless work slave"

i think its mostly there to teach you critical thinking

Been digging into things on Canadian/British, United States/British and South American/Spanish history recently and the notable thing that has come up on both - in all three cases, the European settlers were the ones actively engaging in genocide of the indigenous population. It was not the active policy of the European government.

In all three cases the European government actually passed protective legislation for the rights of indigenous subjects at the request of either indigenous people themselves travelling to Europe to make these representations, or not-entirely-awful Europeans passing on what was happening to them. They weren’t *incredible* protections in any of the three cases, but they at least recognised that indigenous people were *people* with actual basic rights. Like “not being automatically murdered or enslaved”.

But then European settlers went *batshit* at this legislation. The entire idea of “No Genocide” policies provoked enormous settler backlashes in all three cases. It was even a material, if not enormous, factor in why the US declared independence.

And the European governments in question just…rolled over. Made no real attempt to enforce this protective legislation. And it *certainly* was *not* why Britain sent in troops when the US declared independence. The Founding Fathers just viewed even the fact they had been *asked* to not murder indigenous people as an outrage.

None of this is to excuse European colonial states today of our responsibility to pay reparations and lobby for protections for indigenous people (and BIPOC in general) in our ex-colonial states. We’ve benefitted so much, especially on mass resource plundering, that reparations are a responsibility we cannot shirk.

(I just finished a biography of Charles Hapsburg and how he frittered away *massive* silver imports stolen from South America on European wars. That huge resource injection was pretty vital to the beginning of European international capitalism in the 16th-17th centuries. Before that, states just kept coming up against insufficient metals for currency, especially ones with the intermediate value of silver that let a critical mass of lower-level transactions happen.)

What it is, however, is an examination of the different ways states can be responsible for genocide, eugenics, and other crimes.

It does not need to be active policy for a state to be responsible. Even passing protective legislation doesn’t prevent a state’s responsibility if they don’t take measures to enforce that legislation, and, particularly, *if they give in to loud backlash from privileged parties who see it as an infringement of their privilege for people they are oppressing to be given some basic rights.*

I am not a proponent of “history repeats itself”. Context *always* matters, and every different situation has a different context. However, history itself provides an incredibly important and *necessary* context for situations we face now. And these facts are *incredibly* relevant to *many* situations we are currently facing.

always on my marxist bullshit, but the idea that a parent must be solely devoted to their child to the wholesale detriment and complete exhaustion of themselves is exactly why the bourgeois family is an act of universal violence. no one gets the care they need in that situation, and the ruling class continues to profit off of unpaid reproductive labor through the propaganda that parental exhaustion and monomaniacal devotion is pure, noble, and the only way a child can be raised without harm.

blended families, extended families, and other forms of borderless communal childcare have been the norm for the majority of human existence. the bourgeois family is an unnatural, alienating imposition completely geared towards justifying ruling class generational wealth consolidation, and beatifying a system that compensates 0% of the labor it takes to provide care, comfort, safety, hygiene, etc. for the reproduction of both tomorrow's and the next generation's labor.

anyway real facts this is why mainstream storytelling never can hit just right when it tries to tell the stories of parents and children with both being fulfilled and complete human beings. it literally can't propose a resolution to those contradictions unless it wants to start asking a whoooooole lot of other questions about families and social reproduction under capitalism....