@thespectrehauntingfodlan / thespectrehauntingfodlan.tumblr.com
study of waldmuller's portrait of louise mayer, but featuring edelgard. it might look like i deviated a lot from the original, but actually the whole skin is pretty much based on it.
i wish i had more time to refine this... but i have so much to do today (and i got distracted by dmcl what's new)
I wish all of my followers a wonderful Big Dumb Idiot Baby Apple Fight Friday
Artist: tsulala on Twitter (X)
Western anarchists are so funny. "We are still around and even more than MLs" lol! Lmao!
you see europe and the US are the entire world and there's more anarchists in these two places (for reasons we cannot fully understand). very sad for us MLs that there isn't some kind of ML country (perhaps a people's republic) that is one of the most populous countries in the world and with the largest communist party in history. anarchists have truly defeated us as an ideology with their many successful revolutions that happened in subreddits and discord servers. time to pack up our books and go home. 😔😔😔😔
China is actually an anarchist free teritory led by Bakunist-Machnovist Trade Union of China. Tankies trying to coopt succesful anarchist projects smh smh
sir are you familiar with the Spanish inquisition
You mean the judicial system that had one of the lowest mortality rates ever and was only permitted to prosecute Christians for Heresy and Clergy for bad behaviour and yet is the target of the most retarded Anglo-Protestant mythology and fairy tales (Projection of their own sins) ? .
saying that the Spanish inquisition was only permitted to prosecute Christians is misleading to the point of dishonesty- the inquisition was a 1-2 punch with the Alhambra decree, a decree whereby all jewish people in Spain were forced to either convert or be expelled or killed, and then the inquisition steps in to hound converts for suspected "crypto-judaism" (ie, continuing jewish religion practices in private.)
also, even if the conventional narrative around the Spanish inquisition were just protestant projection of their own sins, it would remain true that people acting in the name of Jesus were responsible for atrocities, since protestants are also Christian.
also, you do realize that most people don't think it's good to prosecute Christians for heresy, right? who is that argument even intended to win over? who do you imagine that would be against persecution of other religions, but fine with persecution of people practicing the same religion slightly differently?
>or killed
There were no instances of physical violence with the expulsion of Jews of 1492 , stop lying .It was actually the only one without such mass violence if you do some actual research .
>crypto-judaism
Yes , convicting people who claimed to be Christian and were not truly .Literally what I said , motherfucker .
Protestants are not Christian , genius .
You can only say someone is a Heretic if they claim to be the same religion as you , you are trying to rewrite the meaning of a word to win an argument .Also , their religions are obviously false .
There were no instances of physical violence with the expulsion of Jews of 1492 , stop lying
if you would perhaps learn how to read, then go back and re-read what i said, you'll notice what i actually said was that jewish people were given the option to either convert, be expelled, or be killed, and i didn't make any statement as to whether anyone was killed for refusing to take the first two options.and if we look at the translated text of the alhambra decree itself:
And concerning this we command this our charter to be given, by which we order all Jews and Jewesses of whatever age they may be, who live, reside, and exist in our said kingdoms and lordships, as much those who are natives as those who are not, who by whatever manner or whatever cause have come to live and reside therein, that by the end of the month of July next of the present year, they depart from all of these our said realms and lordships, along with their sons and daughters, menservants and maidservants, Jewish familiars, those who are great as well as the lesser folk, of whatever age they may be, and they shall not dare to return to those places, nor to reside in them, nor to live in any part of them, neither temporarily on the way to somewhere else nor in any other manner, under pain that if they do not perform and comply with this command and should be found in our said kingdom and lordships and should in any manner live in them, they incur the penalty of death and the confiscation of all their possessions by our Chamber of Finance, incurring these penalties by the act itself, without further trial, sentence, or declaration.
so what i said was actually completely 100% true. nice try though.
also i'm pretty skeptical of the claim that the Spanish never at any point acted on their threat. hell, arguably the persecution of "crypto-jews" was itself acting on that threat. so [citation needed].
but lets say that for the sake of argument i humor this claim.
It was actually the only one without such mass violence if you do some actual research
oh, could you tell me more about some of these expulsions of jewish people in medieval europe which involved mass violence. perhaps tell me specifically about what religion the people committing this mass violence were doing it in the name of.
Yes , convicting people who claimed to be Christian and were not truly .Literally what I said , motherfucker .
alright well you realize that everyone who isn't a horrible little freak considers this to be a deranged thing to kill or torture someone for.
Protestants are not Christian , genius .
they consider themselves to be christian, however. are all protestants heretics, in your eyes?
You can only say someone is a Heretic if they claim to be the same religion as you ,
okay? i never claimed otherwise, also extremely weird hill to die on since, as i pointed out (and you misread) anyone who would object to you persecuting other religions would also object to you persecuting "heretics" within your own religion, there isn't a single person who would be won over by your argument here.
>are all Protestants heretics ?
i think it's also wrong to persecute members of your own group too, actually.
also like, i find it incredibly hard to believe that you believe violence against protestants is justified, but not violence against jewish or muslim people. especially since you jumped onto this post to defend a tweet condemning islam.
To enforce the Doctrine that someone claiming to be Christian is refusing to follow .
I condemn Islam , obviously .But Muslims did not agree to follow Christian Doctrine .It is called actual reasoning .
alright well just be aware that to everyone who isn't a conquistador who just emerged from an iceberg after a centuries-long slumber, you seem like an absolute freak of nature.
KONKEESTADOWR
You are the face of barbarism and savagery and your beliefs have led to the worst tragedies in Human existence .Go back to the cave , caveman .
You are the face of barbarism and savagery
based.
insane I mean neurodivergent system of belief to the point that I'm confused why they bother to rehabilitate the Inquisition when based on their other posts they have no issue with killing people anyway.
yeah like, generally when people make arguments i can at least get a sense of who they imagine their argument might convince, but like. with this guy. what's the target audience here. like who is the person who would go "oh i thought the spanish inquisition was bad. but then i found out that they only tortured and murdered people who self-identified as christian. and now i think it was good."
it’s giving like terminal libertarian contractualism like it’s fine because in declaring belief you have also consented to be subjected to the entirety of regulatory functions of the organisation. cheap talk from someone unaware their role in the christofeudal* order would be horse cock polisher to the lowliest of hidalgos if anything
"Bush lied about Iraq, Biden lies about Palestine"
Sticker spotted in New York
Okay, this is important: Biden also lied about Iraq.
In 2005, the now-former-chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee confirmed that he had sent a memo to everyone in the Senate, saying that investigations had revealed that every single claim being made by the Bush administration about Iraq was either an outright lie or was, at best, neither provable nor disprovable. This memo went out two weeks before the vote.
Biden, like Hillary Clinton, still voted for the war, and made public statements supporting it.
The largest antiwar demonstrations the world had ever seen to that date were held against the Bush administration, and yet Biden still backed it. He didn’t even have to make the intelligence memo public — he could have used those demonstrations and his famous religious beliefs — the ones which had him trying to ban abortion in Congress for more than 3 decades — as public excuses to vote against it if his state was not mostly against the war. (I’m not sure whether his state was majority-antiwar or not. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, also voted for the invasion even though New York, which she notionally represented, was polling at over 60% antiwar.)
Neoliberal Democrats have every bit as much guilt as Republicans for the state of the world today.
Ibrahim Traoré 🥺
tumblr isnt letting me post this fucking screenshot but its so funny
The evil "a state is a tool defined by its class character and can be used to protect and carry out revolution" commies refuse to acknowledge that states are actually inherently evil because they are hierarchies!!
Just identifying hierarchies and labeling them as inherently bad is probably the weakest form of understanding power relations, it's so idealist it's physically painful.
None of those things have anything to do with each other
vice news writers have not been to college
Me either, but I still know how to write an article
Reading comprehension quiz
1. Why has the author chosen to contrast these two ideas in one sentence? What is the effect this contrast has to the reader?
2. Can we determine the authors opinion on Zuckerberg from the work? What impression of Zukerberg is this work meant to evoke?
anti-ai people need to understand that the opposition communists have to luddism and reactionary sentiment isn't like, a moral one. the main problem with luddism is that it doesn't actually work. like when we say 'we mustn't try to fight against technology itself, we need to fight against the social system that makes it so that advancement in technology and labour-saving devices lead to layoffs' the reason we're saying it is because, if you try fighting the technology, you're going to lose, and you're still going to lose your job too. when you say 'yeah i understand your criticism but I'm still going to fight against AI' you very clearly did not understand the criticism, because the point is that it isn't even in your own self-interest, because it will not work. the fact that, even if it did work, it would only mean maintaining a privileged strata of 'skilled labour' above other workers is secondary -- because, again, flatly resisting technological advancement has never worked in history.
> privileged strata of 'skilled labour'
Love when simple, rancid jealousy is couched in communist theory.
If we're going to block one technology to save the human jobs it might replace, why not go further? Why should we allow digital art to exist at all when it costs the jobs of those who manufacture ink, paint, pencils, and paper? Why allow artists to sell digital copies at the expense of the jobs of the people who would make physical copies? Why allow artists to sell things online with automated payment processors when it costs the jobs of those who would process payments manually?
Blocking AI for the purpose of protecting jobs would only serve to protect specific kinds of jobs. It would be a special exemption made to protect a specific labor stratum. How would that not be a legal privilege? Unless you're willing to go all the way in banning labor-saving technology to buttress human participation in the economy, then you're just picking and choosing who gets to have their job protected and who doesn't.
The solution is not to ban technology, the solution is to organize the working class.
Why are y'all treating art as a commodity? The grip with AI art is that it's an insult to humanity. Art is about sharing and connecting with each other through it. The prompt you put into the Art Theft Machine isn't creating anything that does any of those things. Yes it's (at a short glance) aesthetically pleasing and it's probably gonna keep improving. That is not enough. It is not meaningful. It is not art.
Comparing this to Luddites is insane. Artists losing their space and funding is a collateral because the fundamental problem is that people like y'all don't appreciate the role that art plays.
Sorry but your positions are completely self contradictory. Despite what you’ve said you clearly do view art as a commodity (which it fundamentally is if we’re discussing it in the terms of costs and job loss), since you mention art theft. In fact, it’s particularly the capitalist institution of copyright that reifies something along the lines of digital art into a discreet commodity rather than an infinitely replicable image.
What I find more interesting and worth arguing with is your assertion that it fundamentally isn’t art. What are your criteria for what is and isn’t art? Is a collage art? Fundamentally as long as there is intent behind the piece I don’t see why it can’t be art. Where do you draw the line?
the luxuries, comfort, and relative safeties of the imperial core are not things that anyone in the imperial core (whether labor-aristocracy or bourgeois) are entitled to, in that they are fundamentally bought through plunder, through global imperial extraction. the democrat votescold anxiety and moral indignation is rooted in a feeling of entitlement to the relative safety of being some of the privileged few who aren't as explicitly and specifically targeted by the usamerican ruling classes. the reality is that the usamerican regime is in decline, that this is a net positive for basically all of humanity, and that the cost of this is that the historical process of this empire's decline involves the inevitable decay of the conditions within the imperial core, which will progress to the detriment of the usamerican labor aristocracy. these conditions necessarily must progress before the material and political conditions can be correct for the liberation of the imperial core from the remaining shackles of capital -- and this is likely to happen after the rest of the world has advanced further in their global revolution, because of the nature of what the imperial core is and how it works, in that it is likely last bastion of capital to fall, in its nature as the central fortress, the king's castle within the city limits.
the second part of this which democrats votescolds fail to contend with is that the decay is underway, it is a process which is already in progress. it cannot be forestalled nor prevented any more than one can veer away from a cliff edge after one has already driven over it. when we say that that the decay will progress regardless of which usamerican bourgeois ruler acts as the head-of-state, we are acknowledging the material processes which are already moving.
i think these analytical distortions are part and parcel of the cosmology of the average usamerican liberal, who believes the perpetual existence of the usamerican state is a cosmic given specifically because the bounds of the usamerican state are the bounds of the reality. you can see this in how they discuss the creation of the usamerican state as a kind of universal genesis story, and the history of the settler-colony as an entire form of universal cosmological history. this is in turn an expression of a peculiarity to the constrained temporality of the settler colony and the ambivalent insecurity in its legitimacy, which was born out of wild bloodshed.
they ask "what can we do, if we cannot vote for either??" because to imagine the end of the regime is to imagine the end of the universe. to the liberal it is repellent to imagine in the sense that the mind is repelled from imagining - it balks at what it cannot comprehend without existential fear. telling a liberal that they should fight for the destruction of the empire is like telling a liberal they should fight for the destruction of the universe. this too is an aspect of ideology.
The perils of living in a communist country:
you have no idea how much I love the mindset revealed when liberals say "a revolution would kill disabled people". in order to Make Glorious Violent Revolution mobs of randos who felt kinda violent that day will specifically target all hospitals and beat up door dashers on the streets. they will bomb all infrastructure for some reason so electricity and water stops
do these people not consider how many people die and suffer each day rn through being denied medical care? I don't like defending marxists because y'all are annoying, but liberals need to deal with reality. we aren't voting in decent universal healthcare. the ruling class only hands those goodies out when it fears being overthrown
If you don't like Marxists then why are you following a Marxist-Leninist...?
my poor sweet child 😩 Shadowheart
