You cannot say that you like Pocahontas. The genocide of my people is turned into a cartoon musical with a singing raccoon?
real talk. checking myself hard.
Diane Ravitch on The Daily Show.
Ravitch is the queen. If only the government would listen…
We would also address poverty directly. We would increase the minimum wage and make post-secondary education cheap or free, and we’d improve improve unemployment benefits and offer free job-training to the unemployed.
Poverty is one of the few social ills where throwing money at the problem really does seem to work.
These are not radical, liberal ideas. In fact, in Europe most of them are associated with the more conservative parties, and many of them were associated with the American Republican party in the 80s. But the United States’s political climate is so different from anywhere else in the industrialized world that I fear we will just continue to get farther behind in education (and in % of people living in poverty) until we decide to make some big domestic investments.
His body isn’t even cold yet and the New York times has already put out a shameful article declaring Nelson Mandela to be an “icon of peaceful resistance”. News outlets around the Western world are hurrying to publish obituaries that celebrate his electoral victory while erasing the protracted and fierce guerrilla struggle that he and his party were forced to fight in order to make that victory possible. Don’t let racist, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of another radical. Nelson Mandela used peaceful means when he could, and violent means when he couldn’t. For this, during his life they called him a terrorist, and after his death they’ll call him a pacifist — all to neutralize the revolutionary potential of his legacy, and the lessons to be drawn from it.
Don’t fucking let them.
Okay, also wrong.
1) Nelson Mandela WAS an icon of peaceful resistance, but not in the simplistic way the NYT article (and, I’m sure, many that will follow) believe he was. You see, when Mandela was arrested in 1962, he was, indeed, the leader of the ANC’s armed forces. That is not a fact that people should forget.
However, when he started negotiations with the apartheid regime in the late 1980s, South Africa was in the midst of what was basically an undeclared civil war. Violence was everywhere and often very unfocused; don’t think for one second that it was all between anti-apartheid fighters against people upholding the apartheid regime. The deaths/beatings/tortures/rapes were largely civilian-focused, and everyone was hurting everyone else (with white-on-white, black-on-black, black-on-Indian, Indian-on-coloured, coloured-on-black, so on and so forth). For an example, Google anything about “necklacing”.
It was b a d.
In order for the country not to collapse completely, someone needed to emerge as a leader who favored political negotiation and peaceful tactics over the violence that was ravaging the country, and Nelson Mandela, whose release had been advocated for over the past few years, found himself thrust into that position to the point that he started negotiating for the fall of apartheid from prison. He did what he needed to do because any more violence would have completely destroyed South Africa. He chose ending apartheid over saving face with the already-emerging anti-apartheid politicians, chose negotiating with the enemies that he hated over seeing more of his people die because of an ego or power trip or an extreme ideology (see: most of the leaders of both sides at this point). He chose making peace over expressing his anger, or (an even bigger issue now), his racial/ethnic affiliation. If he isn’t an “icon of peaceful resistance” for this, I don’t know who is.
2) “He and his party” Hahaha no. There were different parties and different voices and different races who fought together against the regime, not just the ANC. The ANC is one part of a MUCH LARGER MOVEMENT, one that included the people who would become the DA (the ANC’s biggest political rival), one that included not only the black Africans (mainly Zulu) that the ANC represents but also the Xhosa and the Tswana and the Sotho and the Coloureds and the Indians and The Black Sash and the Jews. IT WAS NOT JUST THE ANC.
Also, the ANC is actually largely why the country is so fucked up right now, because the party wants to keep power over actually doing anything good for its people (see: President Robert “Yes I raped that lesbian HIV-positive AIDS activist but I’m getting acquitted because I’m in power and I’m not HIV positive because I took a shower afterwards” Zuma; see: President Thabo “yeah I committed crimes against humanity but come on hear me talk more about how HIV isn’t a real thing and what all my people are dying of AIDS because I refuse to provide any knowledge or treatment LALALALA I can’t hear you LALALA” Mbeki)
3) “Don’t let racist, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of another radical.” Don’t let your ignorant, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of a man who is recognized as an amazing leader of a country and continent seriously lacking them. Don’t let your lack of knowledge of contemporary African politics let you think for one goddamn second that praising someone’s violence is a good thing. Don’t let your Western all-blacks-are-same ideology not recognize the true radicalism in his ideology, which is that ethnic groups should not matter and people should work together regardless.
4) “Nelson Mandela used peaceful means when he could, and violent means when he couldn’t.” Hahahaha take this, reverse it. He started violent and ended peaceful.
5) “For this, during his life they called him a terrorist,” Nope. They called him a terrorist because he fought against the apartheid regime, and the apartheid regime was allied with the West during the Cold War. He would have been a terrorist regardless of the amount of violence he actually used.
"and after his death they’ll call him a pacifist" Yep. Because he was (kind of) in the end. Although the Truth & Reconciliation Commission was totally Desmond Tutu’s brainchild, so don’t listen to anyone crediting him with that.
"All to neutralize the revolutionary potential of his legacy," hopefully by now you realize that if you mean "revolutionary" to mean "violence is okey-dokey" you are full of shit. His revolutionary act was to be a Xhosa leading a largely Zulu resistance-cum-political party; his revolutionary act was to negotiate with a racial/ethnic enemy. His revolution rested in whom he dared to talk to, not whom he dared to hurt.
"and the lessons to be drawn from it." Yeah, the wrong lessons will be drawn from it, but not for the reasons you think. People will just think his thought process was "peace at any cost" instead of "w o w having a violent revolution was a super stupid idea because everyone is dying. Let’s take a different approach that doesn’t involve my wife directing her own band of assassins and me being imprisoned for almost 30 years that sounds grand".
An Actual Fucking (Half) South African
P.S. This is still super-simplified (I could literally spend hours explaining all the ins and outs of apartheid/the anti-apartheid movement/Mandela himself), but I think it does its job at least somewhat okay.
Let us continue to live out his vision of a society free from oppression. Rest in peace.
A lot of people mix up what they can do, what they should do, and what everyone can or should do. Even more mix up not being allowed to do something with facing reasonable and significant consequences as a result of doing something.
I love comics. Frequently, it doesn’t feel like they love me back—but I, like most fans, can take it. I can weather the bloated crossover events, the gimmicky romances, the deaths that you know won’t last before the bullet even leaves the gun. I can take artists who only draw three faces and X-TREME BLOODSHED and a million animal sidekicks.
But god almighty, I am so tired of crappy fashion in superhero comics.
Call it a nonissue. Call it a frivolous concern. I call it a massive missed opportunity and offer the critic an insouciant flip of my hair. When Bryan Lee O’Malley tweeted this a while back, I nearly stood up and cheered: “A cool thing about comics is FASHION = CHARACTER. you can convey personality through clothing. Why do 90% of western artists ignore this.” He gets it—and unsurprisingly, Scott Pilgrim is one of the only Western comics I can think of that uses fashion to effectively convey characterization. Through a character’s clothes, the reader gleans insight into their insecurities, ambitions, social status and more—y’know, the basics of subtle characterization. The titular Scott is a slacker geek dude in reference-happy t-shirts and jeans. Flighty, jaded Ramona is a mercurial hipster pixie with ever-changing hair. Wry Wallace Wells dons monogrammed polos and boxer briefs. Knives Chau starts out a meek schoolgirl in kilts and an overgrown ponytail, then graduates to a slightly-less-innovative version of Ramona’s wardrobe and a big red streak in her hair when trying to win back Scott’s affections. The cast of background characters actually look like the Vertigo-reading, concert-going, Banksy-coffee-table-book owning chic geek set of today and the story is more emotionally resonant because of this immersive realism. THIS MATTERS, YOU GUYS.
But year after year after year, the comics industry ignores it. Male characters are dressed as blandly as possible, or come clad in weird, baggy approximations of early 2000s fashion. Female characters exist in a world where—surprise!—most clothes are tight and sexy, albeit oddly out of date and in clashing colors. Their civilian lives seem more flat and unreal as a result, their emotional entanglements more eyeroll-inducing because honestly, they look like the cast of an old daytime soap. Fashion impacts our lives every day, at every turn—we judge people based on what they wear, where they wear it, and where they bought it, even if we aren’t consciously doing it. When I say I want more thoughtful fashion in comics, I don’t mean that I need every character looking like they stepped off a runway—I mean that I want comic creators to think about who their characters are, what they would be most likely to wear, where they would buy it, their relationship to their body, and how they want the world to see them. I want them to think about their characters on a deeper level. I want them to make good comics.
Good examples of fashion in comics are so rare that I remember them by individual issue, and one such example comes to mind now. Cliff Chiang is a fantastic artist in general, and as I discovered at San Diego Comic-Con 2013, a pretty stylish dude himself. His current work on Wonder Woman features a lot of mindful clothes, but it’s a comic he illustrated in 2010 that really comes to mind. Brave and the Bold #33 featured a melancholy story about Zatanna foreseeing Barbara Gordon’s wheelchair-bound future, thus inspiring her to take Babs and Wonder Woman out for a ladies night of dancing and drinking. It’s a lovely issue for a lot of reasons, but I found myself truly impressed by the way he dresses the three women for their night on the town. They each wear cocktail dresses that actual real life women would wear today, but moreover, each dress fits each woman. Barbara, pretty young thing that she is, sports a hot pink bandage dress. Zatanna’s look is, appropriately, a little more witchy and avant-garde. Diana wears a draped piece that incorporates more structured, Grecian elements without screaming IT’S WONDER WOMAN SHE’S A GREEK AMAZON, GET IT?! It captures who they are, how they see themselves, and the world they live in simply and succinctly and the issue shines because of it.
Fashion matters. Clothes matter. They inform our social lives, our self image, our class consciousness and our goals. Comic creators owe it to their art to care about this more—there’s a reason other entertainment industries devote entire departments of people to this task. For now, we wait—cringing at a world where every female character owns thirty midriff tops, every little girl has pigtails and puffed sleeves and men can only be the Everyman Hero in jeans or the Billionaire Hero in a generic business suit.
"Did you conspire?" said the President.
"Yes," answered Buonarotti.
"What motive induced you to conspire?"
"The love of mankind."
"What were the principles that directed you?"
"The rights of man."
"But did you intend to overthrow the present Constitution?"
"Yes! and till I cease to live I will ever conspire against tyrants. Was it worth while to shed the blood of two millions of citizens in order to restore slavery again? Was it worth while to crush the ci-devant, in order to bow to the ci-après?”
"But are you not a foreigner?"
"No man is an alien to the cause of human nature."
Buonarotti before the Military Commission, quoted from the introduction to The History of Babeuf’s Conspiracy for Equality.
I love magicqueers headcanons in general, but the occasional massively out of character ones really get on my nerves.
If you’re gonna do a quick and dirty “import character development”, you should at least say you’re doing it, and not just expect everyone to go along with some OC who bears the name of a canon character and has nothing else in common.
(There are some things that it is reasonable to assume characters would do, and there are other things that are only within the realm of possibility after thousands and thousands of words of character development in fanfic.)
(Yes I realize that the point of magicqueers is not canon compliance. However I generally count it as a positive when the fact of a person’s queerness does not distort or overshadow ALL THEIR OTHER TRAITS.)
(Most magicqueers stuff is very good about this. Exception rather than rule.)
ALSO CRAZY EXPENSIVE.
IT’S MOSTLY A SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS OF THE COOKING PROCESS. IT GIVES LOADS OF KNOWLEDGE ON HOW AND WHY THINGS DO THE THINGS THEY DO, BUT GIVES… BASICALLY ZERO RECIPES THAT THE AVERAGE KITCHEN COULD MAKE.
SO IF YOU LIKE SCIENCE, THIS IS GREAT!
IF YOU JUST WANT TO COOK SHIT, IT’S PROBABLY NOT FOR YOU~
Oh hey, if anyone is interested in this sort of thing but also doesn’t want to drop wads of cash, edx currently has a science and cooking course which should theoretically cover the same things. It’s free, easy to sign up, and also, you don’t have to do the assignments if you’re just interested in watching the lectures or reading the transcripts or w/e. Also the hands-on assignments are designed to be p basic and easy to complete with stuff you have in your kitchen already and maybe a couple other things to get at the store. (I think; I haven’t done any yet.)
Disclaimer: I personally don’t really like the lecture format, which is broken up into a series of short videos that altogether are about an hour long; idk, it just really pisses me off to have to click through. If you’re like me, there’s ur warning, but if that sounds aces to you, have fun : >
*HAPPY NOISES BECAUSE I FORGOT THAT SITE EXISTED*