Hi, I was replaying the Tomix saga- long story short, I just reread the part when Tomix, during his farewell speech, said about the Hero
“They mean the world to me”
I am not okay.
Xuebing Du

#extradirty
todays bird
will byers stan first human second
Today's Document

izzy's playlists!
art blog(derogatory)

⁂

Discoholic 🪩

Janaina Medeiros
taylor price
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

if i look back, i am lost

Andulka
hello vonnie
Misplaced Lens Cap
we're not kids anymore.
Mike Driver
d e v o n
NASA

seen from Belarus
seen from Finland
seen from Spain

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Italy

seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from South Korea
seen from Türkiye

seen from United Kingdom

seen from Indonesia
seen from India

seen from Finland

seen from United States
seen from Germany

seen from Türkiye
@alimpson
Hi, I was replaying the Tomix saga- long story short, I just reread the part when Tomix, during his farewell speech, said about the Hero
“They mean the world to me”
I am not okay.
I'm asking this genuinely, as a 19 yo with no education in economics and a pretty surface level understanding of socialism: can you explain the whole Bananas discourse in a way someone like me might understand? In my understanding it's just "This is just a product we can give up to create better worker conditions and that's fine" but apparently that's not the full picture?
alright so some pretty important background to all this is that we're all talking about the fact that bananas, grown in the global south, are available year-round at extremely low prices all around europe and the USA. it's not really about bananas per so--the banana in this discourse is a synechdoche for all the economic benefits of imperialism.
so how are cheap bananas a result of imperialism? first of all i want to tackle a common and v. silly counterargument: 'oh, these ridiculous communists think it's imperialist for produce to be shipped internationally'. nah. believing that this is the communist objection requires believing in a deeply naive view of international traide. this view goes something like 'well, if honduras has lots of bananas, and people in the usa want bananas and are willing to pay for them, surely everyone wins when the usa buys bananas!'.
there are of course two key errors here and they are both packed into 'honduras has lots of bananas'. for a start, although the bananas are grown in honduras, honduras doesn't really 'have' them, because the plantations are mostly owned by chiquita (formerly known as united fruit) dole, del monte, and other multinationals--when they're not, those multinationals will usually purchase the bananas from honduran growers and conduct the export themselves. and wouldn't you know it, it's those intervening middleman steps--export, import, and retail, where the vast majority of money is made off bananas! so in the process of a banana making its way from honduras to a 7/11, usamerican multinationals make money selling the bananas to usamerican importers who make money selling them to usamerican retailers who make money selling them to usamerican customers.
when chiquita sells a banana to be sold in walmart, a magic trick is being performed: a banana is disappearing from honduras, and yet somehow an american company is paying a second american company for it! this is economic imperialism, the usamerican multinational extracting resources from a nation while simultaneously pocketing the value of those resources.
why does the honduran government allow this? if selling bananas is such a bad deal for the nation, why do they continue to export millions of dollars of banans a year? well, obviously, there's the fact that if they didn't, they would face a coup. the united states is more than willing to intervene and cause mass death and war to protect the profits of its multinationals. but the second, more subtle thing keeping honduras bound to this ridiculously unbalanced relationship is the need for dollars. because the US dollar is the global reserve currency, and the de facto currency of international trade, exporting to the USA is a basic necessity for nations like honduras, guatemala, &c. why is the dollar the global reserve currency? because of usamerican military and economic hegemony, of course. imperialism built upon imperialism!
this is unequal exchange, the neoimperialist terms of international trade that make the 'global economy' a tool of siphoning value and resources from the global south to the imperial core. & this is the second flaw to unravel in 'honduras has a lot of bananas' -- honduras only 'has a lot of bananas' because this global economic hegemony has led to vast unsustainable monoculture banana plantations to dominate the agriculture of honduras. it's long-attested how monoculture growth is unsustainable because it destroys soil and leads to easily-wiped-out-by-infection plants.
so, bananas in the USA are cheap because:
the workers that grow them are barely paid, mistreated, prevented from unionizing, and sometimes murdered
the nations in which the bananas are grown accept brutally unfair trade and tariff terms with the USA because they desperately need a supply of US dollars and so have little position to negotiate
shipping is also much cheaper than it should be because sailors are chronically underpaid and often not paid at all or forced to pay to work (!)
bananas are cheap, in conclusion, because they're produced by underpaid and brutalized workers and then imported on extortionate and unfair terms.
so what, should we all give up bananas? no, and it's a sign of total lack of understanding of socialism as a global movement that all the pearl-clutching usamericans have latched onto the scary communists telling them to stop buying bananas. communism does not care about you as a consumer. individual consumptive choices are not a meaningful arena of political action. the socialist position is not "if there was a socialist reovlution in the usa, we would all stop eating bananas like good little boys", but rather, "if there's a socialist revolution in the countries where bananas are grown, then the availability of bananas in the usa is going to drop, and if you want to be an anti-imperialist in the imperial core you have to accept that".
(this is where the second argument i see about this, 'oh what are you catholic you want me to eat dirt like a monk?' reveals itself as a silly fucking solipsistic misunderstanding)
and again, let's note that the case of the banana can very easily be generalised out to coffee, chocolate, sugar, etc, and that it's not about individual consumptive habits, but about global economic systems. if you are donkey fucking kong and you eat 100 bananas a day i don't care and neither does anyone else. it's about trying to illustrate just one tiny mundane way in which economic imperialism makes the lives of people in the global north more convenient and simpler and so of course there is enormous pushback from people who attach moral value to this and therefore feel like the mean commies are personally calling them evil for eating a nutella or whatever which is frankly pretty tiring. Sad!
tldr: it is not imperialism when produce go on boat but it is imperialism when produce grown for dirt cheap by underpaid workers in a country with a devalued currency is then bought and exported and sold by usamerican companies creating huge amounts of economic value of which the nation in which the banana was grown, let alone the people who actually fucking grew it, don't see a cent -- and this is the engine behind the cheap, available-every-day-all-year-everywhere presence of bananas in the usa (and other places!)
Occasionally forget people genuinely think capitalism is thousands of years old
One time I was talking about Robin Hood with some coworkers and one guy was like “he was bad because the people he helped learned to expect handouts” and I wanted to be like… okay can you explain how that flawed capitalist propaganda applies to feudalism
reminder that capitalism was literally invented in the 16th century
That’s an exaggeration. What was invented in the 16th century was mercantilism. Capitalism really dates for the beginning of the nineteenth century, with the rise of industry and cash crops over artisans and merchants. Vulture capitalism, with the notion that companies have no duties other than generating profit, is even younger.
Capitalism is only 200 years old and I have to say, they have not been an impressive 200 years
I think a lot of this comes from the fact that most people don’t know the formal definition of capitalism. We all know the word, we’ve all seen the jokes, but very few people bother to actually define it unless they’re talking about political theory and philosophy, so it’s easy to end up with the impression that Capitalism = Money Can Be Exchanged For Goods And Services.
Capitalism is the economic system where most of the means of production (i.e. everything people need to have to make the stuff that everyone wants) are owned by private individuals or corporations, who then hire people to provide the labor necessary to produce things, with the intent of selling the output at a profit. It’s the difference between “you’re a carpenter and you make a chair and you sell it” and “you’re Richard Q. Richington who owns a chair factory, and you pay people to sell the chairs you paid other people to make and then all the excess money goes back to you.” There have been Richard Q. Richingtons on and off throughout history, but that being the norm for every single industry is a pretty recent development.
An alarming amount of people seem to think capitalism = all trade, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence.
it's wild how lack of willingness to show large amounts of your naked body in public is conflated with a discomfort or insecurity about said body. like obviously if people are motivated by those things that's also fine but it's like. "if you like your body you should want to wear as small a swimsuit as possible; the only reason to get """modest""" swimwear is if you're insecure or have religious motivations" so it's weird feeling like nah my body is awesome I just don't want every rando at the municipal pool to have visual access to it? lol. how I feel about my body is unrelated to whether strangers have a right to view it
just like cop shows love engineering scenarios where they can go damn we would have caught the serial puppy killer by now if only police had even more money and power, doctor shows love engineering scenarios where they can go damn we would have solved every problem with this patient's body by now if only patients weren't so pigheaded and lazy and entitled and dishonest
I started wearing a mask in public again just to get used to it, but the three incidents in which I could've been shot by the cops for looking like a Scary Homeless ManTM because my face was covered still haunt me. Like, more than y'all realize. This happened THREE times to one person. And I'm an office worker.
Like, it's summer and I'm not bundled up in a coat, so if anyone thinks I'm a Scary Homeless ManTM that's on them, but it's amazing how there are no solutions to this besides either lowering the amount of racism in the world which is a grain of sand fighting a tidal wave, or not wearing a mask. Dressing in more feminine outfits and wearing eye makeup to signify that I'm a woman completely misses the point, and it's not something I should have to do while just trying to go grocery shopping, and its not something I can do when going to work, because again, office worker.
Wish more people understood or even acknowledged that wearing a mask makes me less safe in other ways. But the only people who seem to acknowledge this are Black men 4 years ago.
I think white and lightskin disabled people should talk about this. I haven't found a single conversation about how people should mask in 2026 that does not come from people who do not experience racism by virtue of their skin color.
It's just infuriating that this is a problem I have to deal with, with my life at risk.
The European Union already forced Apple to abandon its proprietary charging port and adopt USB-C across its entire iPhone lineup. It just did something bigger. A new EU mandate requires every smartphone sold in Europe including Apple devices to feature a battery that can be replaced by the user without specialist tools, without voiding a warranty, and without sending the device to a manufacturer approved service center. Batteries must maintain a minimum capacity threshold after a set number of charge cycles and replacement parts must remain available for up to ten years after a model goes on sale.
The consumer electronics industry built its current business model around batteries that degrade, cannot be replaced at home, and create a natural upgrade cycle every two to three years. The EU just legislated that model out of existence in the world's largest regulatory market.
Apple, Samsung, and every other manufacturer now faces a choice between redesigning their devices for the European market or accepting that their current hardware architecture is no longer legally sellable there.
Given that no company walks away from European consumers voluntarily the phones are going to change and once they change for Europe the rest of the world will ask why theirs still do not.
re ehrc guidance. which is not legally binding.
If you're comfortable accusing anyone of faking disability, you're not a real ally to disabled people
One time when I was a kid a group of girls and I had to treat another student for hypothermia by ourselves because she had so many invisible health issues that the adults we asked for help didn't believe us. The student in question was actively hallucinating. When I finally ran for help the people I grabbed were slow as shit to respond, casually joking about how "dramatic" the person in question was.
The kid was picked up by an ambulance 30 minutes later.
Now as an adult working in security I get SO MANY folks- upper-middle aged mostly- coming to me to 'rat out' people they think are faking it.
I was once sent into a bathroom because a client demanded that the "fucker won't get out, so go drag them out"- I was NEVER going to do that, so I did a wellness check instead. You know who it was? A person recently released from the hospital after a car accident. They had a hole in their skull and major hearing loss. They couldn't answer the owner because they couldn't HEAR the owner.
Another time about a homeless man who got around town by kicking the ground from his wheelchair. "You know he doesn't actually need that thing, his legs work fine, it's just for pity points"- Oh, so he's not paralyzed, his wheelchair is performative? Funny story Dale, I actually know that guy, he was backed over by a truck and has chronic pain from his shattered pelvis. But sure, let's make him stand up and walk everywhere so nobody feels too bad for him and tries to help him or something.
"She doesn't need that scooter, I've seen her get out of it."
"Look how fat he is, because he just rides around and refuses to get up."
"She doesn't really need that cane- she comes here without it all the time"
Sincerely, truly, from the bottom of my heart- as someone who isn't physically disabled but hears this shit all the time- fuck off
I remember when I was younger, anytime I watched a movie where the characters have to kill a scary monster/alien, I always thought the act of killing it was intended to be part of the horror. Like there’s this amazing creature that we’ve never seen before, and maybe under different circumstances we could’ve coexisted with it, but it’s trying to attack you and you have to defend yourself, but by destroying it you also destroy the ability to ever understand it and that’s sad and is supposed to make you feel conflicted.
It was not until well into my adulthood that I realized most people do not have complicated feelings about movies where people have to kill a scary alien monster, nor is that necessarily meant to be part of the narrative (unless it very obviously is). They just want the scary thing to die because it’s scary. I don’t have a real conclusion to this I just started thinking about it for some reason.
I always felt I couldn't possibly be upset about dying to an alien monster because proof of otherwordly life is exactly what it'd take for me to die happy
Just watched Adam Conover (of Adam Ruins Everything) make such a solid point that I think we should spread far and wide. Yes, having AI write your emails is lazy, sure, but people love being lazy. We need to really emphasize that sending AI emails (or using AI responses on social media, or publishing AI flyers, or or or) is rude.
It's rude. You're making someone take their time to read something you couldn't bother to write. You're telling them they were so unimportant you couldn't be bothered to actually take the time to say something yourself. And frankly, you're lying about it while you're at it.
It's rude.
Is anyone else constantly bothered by the fact that all of a child's medical care is required to go through their parents? That they must rely on these people to decide when they do or don't need medical care?
No matter how injured. If a parent doesn't deem it necessary to see a doctor, it doesn't happen. Teachers can suggest a doctor visit, but unless it's a very acute injury (and even then), it's ultimately up to the parents.
You can be 13. Twisted, maybe broken ankle. You teacher lets you sit out in PE. She's concerned, and tells you to rest when you go home, and see a doctor. You get home, ur parents fill a bath and add some Epsom salts, and then laugh at you for using it moms old colorguard stick as a cane. Take some ibuprofen they say. It's just a little sprain, ur a kid.
You go to school the next day, go to ur office assistant time. Office calls ur mom to come get you, because you're clearly in too much pain for school. Your mom laughs when she gets you, says you just were so determined not to miss school. Scolds you for making the office ladies worry.
You never see a doctor for the injury.
Your parents come into the exam room at every visit. This does not stop with age, except for gynecologist. But your parents are on the medical release forms. They fill them out for you, with you. You do not get to take them off.
You never get to tell s doctor about the ankle. Even though it never quote healed right, and it hurts every day.
Then your 18. In college. Still on your parents insurance, and have no car. The on campus clinic only does std testing. You fall down some stairs. Same injury. You call your parents, crying from the pain. You are using a mop as a cane. They console you and say to have a bath, take some meds, and let them know how it feels in a few days. You end up borrowing your roommates rolling chair to get around for the weekend.
By Monday, you can walk again. You walk miles to class every day. You ask to see a doctor, but your parents won't drive the hour to come take you, and you don't have the insurance card. You are still at their mercy for medical care. The ankle tries to heal again. This time worse than before. The tendons click with every step.
Now you're in your twenties. Finally have your own healthcare. You see a doctor. You get to mention the ankle! They say it's been too long to really even know what was damaged. That you have arthritis now. It healed wrong but it can no longer be fixed.
I'm 32 now. My ankle tells me the weather. I wear boots to keep it stable. What could have been a funny story about a fall and a cast has become a lifetime injury. Because children do not have access to medical care without a parents approval.
Honestly a small but very significant part of the reason that we ended up here is because, over the course of the last hundred years or so, humanity has amassed a huge amount of research and knowledge on how to most effectively convince a person of something (cognitively, psychologically, neurophysiologically, etc.)
And then 90% of scientists, researchers, government officials, reporters, etc. who had a conscience all decided that it would be super unethical to act on pretty much any of that research, we have to convince people on the merit of the ideas alone--
And as a result, the only people who actually implemented most of that research on how to effectively change someone's mind were people who didn't care about ethics
...yeah. we gotta get on that. (WITH ETHICS)
Anyway this is why they say "the medium is the message"*
*Translation (very rough): "the medium you use to convey a message always profoundly shapes the message itself." From the book Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, by Marshall McLuhan, 1964. Free pdf via MIT here if you want to read more, it's super cool foundational Media Studies theory
And this is why making political memes can also be activism if you do it right lol
Transcript from image:
From pics community on reddit
You can fight ICE by annoying them
Mess up their food/drink orders- Lose their tickets/reservations
Overtighten lug nuts, strip spark plugs
Give them incorrect but real-sounding information
Record them with your phones
Disrupt them with loud noises (car alarms, music, banging metal) and bright lights (flashlights, headlights)
Shame them
(fuck yeah)
The fascists want complacency.
Do not give it to them.
(fuck them white supremacists )
It is your right to make "Mistakes"
It’s important to note that this is a poster on a glass window. It’s very important to note that the (fuck yeah) and the (fuck them white supremacists) have been written in with a pen by someone on said poster.
Anyways fuck fascists and white supremacists
Transphobia is about to be signed into law in the UK. We can fight this.
I am begging the UK trans community and its allies to attend the Mass Lobby at Parliament on June 25th, 11am-4pm, organised by Trans Solidarity Alliance.
Last year we broke the record for an LGBT+ mass lobby of Parliament. Will you help us break it again? Join us on 25th June 2026 to demand be
The new EHRC Code of Practice pushes trans people out of toilets, hospital wards, and community spaces. It normalises gender policing based on appearance and stereotypes. It becomes statutory guidance in the UK by the end of June.
Trans people are now legally their assigned gender at birth and must join gendered spaces accordingly, but if they are perceived as their lived gender, they can also be ejected from those spaces. The guidance says: either break the law, or don’t pass too well.
A mass lobby is where you invite your MP to discuss your concerns with you in-person. Ask your MP to:
Demand full parliamentary scrutiny, debate, and use their free vote on the EHRC Code of Practice.
Support any motions rejecting the EHRC guidance. As of June 4th, Labour MP Nadia Whittome has submitted a prayer motion - Early Day Motion 240.
Write to Bridget Phillipson, the Minister for Women and Equalities about our concerns
Your MP does not have to be an ally, they do not have to respond to your email for you to show up and greencard them (details below the cut.) What matters is that as many people as possible show up.
I cannot stress this enough: Showing up in person matters. It is much more effective than petitions, emails, and letters.
It is a horrible, stressful time, and I am so sorry if you're trans and live in the UK. But I was at last year's mass lobby and the line for greencarding alone stretched around the back gates. It was a record breaking mass lobby and made us impossible to ignore. Let's do even better this time. Details under the cut:
So. Like 12 years and one day ago I wrote this, pre-Obergefell, and it is still true.
History is not kind to those who spend their lives trying to make the lives of others miserable. The question is simply, "How many other people's lives, how many days of those lives, are you willing to waste in vain?"
Yes yes i know love is love. But they are still killing CHILDREN. over this.
"Love is love" is a milquetoast cishet marketing phrase
Pride is a FUCK YOU to a society that wants us dead.