good morning @alaterielle - Tumblr Blog

Master doc that contains different resources and support for many countries including Palestine, Congo, Haiti, Hawai’i, etc ((the creator is underneath the link))

Master Document

Link to the tweet: https://x.com/seaweedlagoon/status/1772449954046279818?s=46&t=s8SsfXh2OjpNRAj1OBxwqg

White-tail Fawns

as you may know, i had been managing a gofundme for @save-mohamed-family and sending him the donations for a while. gofundme shut down that campaign recently despite me sending them all the necessary documentation because ive had to send money to his friend for him to pick up due to an issue with his bank account, and gofundme isnt willing to take time to work with customers whose infrastructure has been destroyed because theyre in a genocide and war zone.

this is another campaign for mohammed and his family, so please donate if you can. there was around $2000 in donations to be transferred before they shut down my gofundme, and it really sucks that it hasnt reached him. if you donated to mohammeds old gofundme earlier you might have gotten your donations returned.

My name is Katharine, from Maryland in the United States, and I am rais… Katharine Sobotka needs your support for Help Mohammed and his chil

determinate-negation

one of mohammed's daughters is currently very ill and needs medical treatment. please donate if you can

twoguysonebeartrap

Eleanor Guthrie is the “white feminist” character of all time I think, and it’s so interesting that she predates the whole infected “girlboss” term and manages to encapsulate all that the term was supposed to mean without the unnecessary sexism tied to it. Everything Eleanor does, every decision she makes, is entirely reasonable, justified, from her POV, and we all get to see why she makes those decisions. she doesn’t intend harm and she’s entirely unable to comprehend the fact that she IS the villain to so many people, she legitimately does not understand other people as well as she thinks, or why people can’t see her side. She is entirely ignorant of the degrees of oppression, she cannot fathom why she, a rich white woman of an affluent family, has less in common with the other female characters than she thinks, and she cannot comprehend why her black SERVANT wouldn’t trust her completely, and to her he’s nothing more than yet another man who’s betrayed her. to her, everything comes back to the fact that she’s a woman who’s had to survive in a man’s world, but she’s even unaware of how marriage to a traditional english aristocrat would limit her freedom. she believes herself to be much better at strategising and understanding people than she is, and even as she creates more and more enemies and betrays more and more people, and make decisions based on emotion rather than reason, she STILL believe that she’s right, and has the moral high ground, and if only the men around her would listen and the people “below” her in the social hierarchy would listen then everything would work out. she sides with the british empire, believing it to be better for all because it’s better for her, but it isn’t even better for her because her powers are limited by her husband and by her being his wife. this is a ramble but i just think she’s such an interesting character, and that it’s so interesting how the narrative DOES sympathise with her but also gives no quarter in question to whether she’s right in what she does or not. she isn’t, but what she is is understandable. every single character in black sails is a multidimensional human being with their own internal logic driving everything that they do and that’s what makes it so so good

popthirdworld

“When I was 26, I went to Indonesia and the Philippines to do research for my first book, No Logo. I had a simple goal: to meet the workers making the clothes and electronics that my friends and I purchased. And I did. I spent evenings on concrete floors in squalid dorm rooms where teenage girls—sweet and giggly—spent their scarce nonworking hours. Eight or even 10 to a room. They told me stories about not being able to leave their machines to pee. About bosses who hit. About not having enough money to buy dried fish to go with their rice.

They knew they were being badly exploited—that the garments they were making were being sold for more than they would make in a month. One 17-year-old said to me: “We make computers, but we don’t know how to use them.”

So one thing I found slightly jarring was that some of these same workers wore clothing festooned with knockoff trademarks of the very multinationals that were responsible for these conditions: Disney characters or Nike check marks. At one point, I asked a local labor organizer about this. Wasn’t it strange—a contradiction?

It took a very long time for him to understand the question. When he finally did, he looked at me like I was nuts. You see, for him and his colleagues, individual consumption wasn’t considered to be in the realm of politics at all. Power rested not in what you did as one person, but what you did as many people, as one part of a large, organized, and focused movement. For him, this meant organizing workers to go on strike for better conditions, and eventually it meant winning the right to unionize. What you ate for lunch or happened to be wearing was of absolutely no concern whatsoever.

This was striking to me, because it was the mirror opposite of my culture back home in Canada. Where I came from, you expressed your political beliefs—firstly and very often lastly—through personal lifestyle choices. By loudly proclaiming your vegetarianism. By shopping fair trade and local and boycotting big, evil brands.

These very different understandings of social change came up again and again a couple of years later, once my book came out. I would give talks about the need for international protections for the right to unionize. About the need to change our global trading system so it didn’t encourage a race to the bottom. And yet at the end of those talks, the first question from the audience was: “What kind of sneakers are OK to buy?” “What brands are ethical?” “Where do you buy your clothes?” “What can I do, as an individual, to change the world?”

Fifteen years after I published No Logo, I still find myself facing very similar questions. These days, I give talks about how the same economic model that superpowered multinationals to seek out cheap labor in Indonesia and China also supercharged global greenhouse-gas emissions. And, invariably, the hand goes up: “Tell me what I can do as an individual.” Or maybe “as a business owner.”

The hard truth is that the answer to the question “What can I, as an individual, do to stop climate change?” is: nothing. You can’t do anything. In fact, the very idea that we—as atomized individuals, even lots of atomized individuals—could play a significant part in stabilizing the planet’s climate system, or changing the global economy, is objectively nuts. We can only meet this tremendous challenge together. As part of a massive and organized global movement.

The irony is that people with relatively little power tend to understand this far better than those with a great deal more power. The workers I met in Indonesia and the Philippines knew all too well that governments and corporations did not value their voice or even their lives as individuals. And because of this, they were driven to act not only together, but to act on a rather large political canvas. To try to change the policies in factories that employ thousands of workers, or in export zones that employ tens of thousands. Or the labor laws in an entire country of millions. Their sense of individual powerlessness pushed them to be politically ambitious, to demand structural changes.

In contrast, here in wealthy countries, we are told how powerful we are as individuals all the time. As consumers. Even individual activists. And the result is that, despite our power and privilege, we often end up acting on canvases that are unnecessarily small—the canvas of our own lifestyle, or maybe our neighborhood or town. Meanwhile, we abandon the structural changes—the policy and legal work— to others.”

- Naomi Klein

amindamazed

“Climate Change Is a Crisis We Can Only Solve Together” The Nation 17 June 2015

(updated link as of March 2024)

boys4pelefan

tori amos live 1994, under the pink tour.

tearsofrefugees

Rights groups fear tactic of ‘domicide’ trialled in Gaza, where entire areas are made uninhabitable, is being used again

hagiomoto

I wanted to point out that both Google and Apple have already erased the names of those villages from Lebanon’s maps, and they should be held in contempt for it.

femme-4-butches

Public Display of Kissing campaign by Interactive Male from 2008-2009, lesbian and gay couples kiss at PDK campaigns at pride.

fusdoq

On a day like this, April 9th, 2003, Baghdad Museum was destroyed by US forces. they opened the gates of the museum to looting

for-nostalgic-purposes

"Although the U.S. has been actively repatriating artifacts—Immigration and Customs Enforcement returned more than 1,200 items between 2008 and 2015 alone—it has also let some things slide. “It is worth noting that there were no follow-up congressional hearings or independent investigations to pinpoint the parties responsible for the negligence connected to the museum debacle,” Archeology Magazine reported in 2013. What’s more, as the Chicago Tribune reported in 2015, “American military members, contractors, and others caught with culturally significant artifacts they brought home from the war there largely aren’t prosecuted.” It’s not known how many Americans brought home artifacts as souvenirs or war trophies, but one expert suggested to the Tribune that the known cases—a defense contractor who brought back gold-plated items from Saddam’s palaces; a U.S. employee who shipped home an Iraq government seal; a Marine who bought eight ancient looted stone seals off the street—are just “the tiniest tip of the iceberg.”"

"The looting, Al-Hamdani said, was clearly precipitated by the invasion. The war forced archeologists to stop work at their sites and leave behind hundreds of impoverished locals whom they’d trained and employed as excavators. Desperate and out of work, these locals began to earn an income the only way they knew how: by excavating—and selling their finds."

"But even aside from looting, some of the Iraqi artifacts that stayed in the country were badly damaged by the U.S. invasion. The Babylonians’ famous Ishtar Gate, built in 575 BC south of Baghdad and excavated in the early 1900s, offers a stark example. In 2003, U.S. forces established a military camp right in the middle of the archeological site. A 2004 study by the British Museum documented the “extremely unfortunate” damage this caused. About 300,000 square meters were covered with gravel, contaminating the site. Several dragon figures on the Ishtar Gate were damaged. Trenches were cut into ancient deposits, dispersing brick fragments bearing cuneiform inscriptions. One area was flattened to make a landing pad for helicopters; another made way for a parking lot; yet another, portable toilets.

“It is regrettable that a military camp of this size should then have been established on one of the most important archaeological sites in the world,” the study noted. “This is tantamount to establishing a military camp around the Great Pyramid in Egypt or around Stonehenge in Britain.”

To say it’s “regrettable” is an understatement to someone like Al-Hamdani, who noted that because civilization got its start in Mesopotamia, its archeological heritage represents the origins not only of Iraqis, but of all people. Wrecking that, he said, amounts to “looting the memory of humankind.”"

- Sigal Samuel for The Atlantic

kosmogrl

I don’t want to do anything

forages

national geographic july 1964

vintage-tigre

elvishcostello-deactivated20260

i think a lot of people internalized the misogynistic idea that “men are rational and women are emotional” and just went “that’s true… but it’s a good thing!” instead of saying “that’s obviously bullshit and we shouldn’t perpetuate this belief in any form”

petitworld

Zhejiang, China

disease

HILMA AF KLINT / "THE DOVE: III" / 1914-15 [oil on canvas | 61 × 46 7/8"]

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

good morning