“I Stayed At Work For You. You Stay At Home For Us.”

Fortnite Kelsier appeals to me for the same reason that Canon Destiel Putin Election Night was fucking great and its that i like feeling like my brain is sizzling in a frying pan with a bunch of glitter

toast / digital painting by dansedelune

at society6 and redbubble.

Just an FYI for those in the US with insurance issues

People aren’t the only ones with vivid imaginations

One of the Jacobin writers apparently found some 1856 articles about wealth inequality by Frederick Douglass that have never been republished before. They’re really incredible, and it’s fascinating to realize that Douglass appears to share the liberal socialist views of abolitionist Wendell Phillips, whom Douglass was friends with. According to the second article, he was a proto-Georgist too.

“The Accumulation of Wealth,” Frederick Douglass’s Paper, November 28, 1856:

…it is not wealth of itself that produces the dreaded effects, but its accumulation in the hands of a few — creating an aristocracy of wealth, ready to be the tool of an aggressive tyranny, or to become aggressive upon its own account. With an increase of wealth comes an increase of selfishness, devotion to private affairs, and a contempt of public — unless politics can be made to minister to the all absorbing selfishness of the individual…

We are ready to grant that the condition of man, cast as he is into the world naked, and surrounded by elements unfriendly to his continued existence, renders a degree of acquisitiveness necessary for the security of life; but is it just to plead this moderate degree of accumulation, indicated by nature, in justification of the unlimited hoarding of wealth, and monopolies of land, which has converted the entire civilized world into an abode of millionaires and beggars; which renders the enslavement of the peoples of the world possible, and shrouds the future of liberty with gloom?…

Wealth has ever been the tool of the tyrant, the readiest means by which liberty is overthrown. A nation starting with free institutions and customs, begins to increase in wealth, and that wealth to accumulate in the hands of a few, and here is the lever by which, eventually and certainly, the liberties gained in a simpler age will be overthrown.

Wealth is averse to agitation; it abhors revolutions; it calls for peace, at whatever sacrifice. A tyranny of an individual or a class may be winding its subtle meshes around the wealthy, depriving them of the right of unrestrained locomotion, the right of speech, the right of private judgment; but if it leaves them the privilege of grasping and accumulating gold, they are content — nay, will aid the tyranny to subject them who value their liberties enough to struggle for them; for the agitation might endanger their gains…

Louis Napoleon holds his seat today, and other tyrants with him, because they have enlisted the sympathies of capital, by professions of law and order; encouraging and increasing the facilities for growing rich. Say to one of these blinded instruments of tyranny, that personal liberty, the freedom of speech, of thought, of the press, is overthrown; and they will answer you, that commerce flourishes, manufactures increase, public securities are at par. The golden calf set up, they fall down and worship, and shut their eyes to the foul wrongs perpetrated every day on human rights.

Poverty, the natural consequence of wealth unduly accumulated, plays its part in the drama of national degradation. Wherever the palaces tower highest, and enclose within their walls the greatest accumulations of luxury and wealth, there does the peasant grovel lowest in ignorance and misery; there is tyranny most secure and freedom most hopeless…

From whence, in our own country, comes the danger to liberty? Who are the ready tools and apologists of slavery…? The plain answer is, the wealth and the poverty of the nation… We have the controllers of our commercial centres, blinding or buying the poverty-stricken, ignorant masses that fester in their alleys, to the unblushing support of the policy of slaveholding tyranny…

If such a statesman shall devise measures, which, while they will not hamper private enterprise, shall yet prevent the undue accumulation of wealth in the hands of individuals or associations, he will have merited and secured a fame more lasting than has yet fallen to the lot of man. He will have founded a nation which, though subject to human vicissitudes, will yet possess elements of prosperity and permanence, such as no nation has yet enjoyed.

I think “performative social justice” is something that doesn’t get addressed often enough. That’s where much of the toxicity in otherwise well-meaning circles comes from.

What I mean by “performative” social justice is basically “discourse for the sake of discourse” - argument without the purpose of persuasion, in which abstract, theoretical problems are treated as seriously as if they were real-world issues. You see it in fandom all the time. I want to stress that this isn’t directed at anyone or anything in particular. It’s something I see all the time, from all sorts of people, and while I often agree with the points they make, I think it’s ultimately a pretty destructive way of thinking.

With the right rhetoric, you can make anything sound wicked. You can bypass a lot of reasoning and nuance if you sound like you’re confident that you have the moral high-ground (that’s the whole history of politics). And heck, sometimes you do! But you have to critically examine how you came to your conclusion. Nobody wants to seem like the bad guy, especially when a foolish statement can result in instant and viral public ridicule that can circulate for months or years - a pernicious form of Death of the Author. On Tumblr, the desire to conform to a particular opinion is largely motivated by fear. The punishment for deviance is often wildly disproportionate - I think we all know a few examples of things getting way out of hand. It’s seldom in response to things that cause actual, qualifiable harm.

Is there a fix for this? Maybe not on a large scale. But individually, I think it’s important to take a step back when you see drama and ask yourself, “Is this worth it? What am I trying to accomplish? Is this the most effective approach to achieving my goal?”

You’re allowed to disapprove of things casually. You can think something is tacky, in bad taste, or otherwise objectionable without needing to justify your perspective on a grand scale of good versus evil. You don’t need to use social justice as a method of signaling, to continually reestablish to your peers that you’re the Right Kind of Person only the Wrong Kind of People would disagree with. Be sure of yourself and of your beliefs. Accept nuance. A contrary opinion on a relatively trivial matter is not a personal attack, or an opportunity to flex your righteousness. Remember that the people you disagree with are often as vulnerable and well-meaning as you are.

nearly my entire dash is people who were once into a fandom I was once into

(all different ones)

I have the two dumbest horses alive

Miss this dear soul so much

𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘺 𝘣𝘪𝘳𝘵𝘩𝘥𝘢𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘻𝘺 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘻! (𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝟸𝟶𝘵𝘩, 𝟷𝟿𝟽𝟼)❤️🎂