Paper Nautilus

[anexperimentallife]

Maus destroys the “just world” fallacy, and that’s just PART of why many Americans don’t want their kids to read it

Obviously antisemitism is the primary driving force behind many Americans not wanting to take a close look at the Holocaust, but that antisemitism is intertwined with the “just world” “rugged individualist” “bootstrap” “anyone can do anything if they work hard enough” philosophy we Americans get shoved down our throats practically from birth, and which is–counterintuitively–also bound up with the same sort of victim mentality that the Nazis preyed upon to rise to power. (I’ll get to that in a minute.)

The just world school of thought holds that people, in general, get what they deserve. If you fail, you have only yourself to blame. Ask any American school child who was bullied, and they’ve heard adults tell them, “Well, you must have done something to make them bully you.”

The truth of the Holocaust as shown in Maus, though, demands that you either a) abandon that school of thought and acknowledge that the virtue (however you define virtue) and hard work and a can-do attitude cannot save everyone, or b) you must decide that those who perished were somehow not worthy of surviving.

The second is, of course, reprehensible, but those are your only two honest choices. And many American politicians have, in fact, blamed German Jews for their fate, claiming that if they had “fought back harder,” they’d have never been rounded up. (And contrary to popular belief in the US, many Jews did fight back, quite effectively. If not for antisemitism, the stories of Jewish resistance fighters would be legendary.)

“Why do you think that never happened in America?” these politicians and pundits say, refusing to acknowledge that is has, in fact, happened more than once in the United States (and is still happening). Would these same politicians have supported Americans of Japanese descent taking up arms against the US government when the US put them in concentration camps during World War II? How about the Trail of Tears? How do they feel about the ongoing war of genocide against the Native American population? Should Native Americans once again take up arms against the US government? How about Black Americans?

You get the idea. (I’m drifting, I know–If this were a formal essay instead of a stream of consciousness rant begun at 5 am because I couldn’t sleep from thinking about it, I’m sure I’d get points taken off.)

But Spiegleman sums this up more elegantly than I.

Just like many Germans in the 1930s and 1940s, a large percentage of Americans have imagined a third choice; if things are hard, it must be because they are victims of some all-powerful (and non-white, or at least not the “right kind of white”) force that has as its sole goal the destruction of “the white race.”

Now, in a sense, they may be victims, just not of whom they think they are–capitalism (the precursor to and incubator of fascism) and its agents victimize all but a lucky few; the Musks, the Gateses, the Bezoses. These white supremacists cannot assign blame to capitalism, though, despite the overwhelming evidence that it and its agents are behind the bulk of their misery, because they’ve been taught that capitalism is the only way they can ever “get ahead” in life.

So who’s to blame? Just who is preventing them from “succeeding” in life? They can’t blame the rich and powerful they worship, of course.

So for Americans in the 2020s, just like Germans in the 1930s and 1940s, it must be that the entire world is ranged against them, led by… who, I wonder?

Oh, of course–it must be the Jews. (And now the Muslims.) The Black people. The Indigenous. The Arabs. The Asians. The Romani. (Because although there are exceptions, the majority of those in this mindset think of America as a white country, just as they thought of Germany as a white country.)

It must be the LGBTQA+ community. (It is no accident that the books in those famous Nazi bonfires were volumes of LGBTQA+ literature and research.) It must be Everyone Who Is Not Us. Everyone not of Our Nationality, Our Specific Brand of Whiteness, Our Specific Religion.

(There’s a reason that conservative Christians in the US have tried to rewrite history to hide that Nazism was a conservative Christian movement that only turned against the Lutheran Church when Lutheran clergy refused to follow famous antisemite and father of Protestantism Martin Luther’s admonition to persecute Jews the way the Nazis demanded.)

In order for white nationalism to survive, it must convince its adherents that–against all evidence–they are the true victims. That their oppression of others is “defense against white genocide.” That’s the only way they can reconcile their imagined superiority with their actual circumstance.

But see, if we teach our children the truth of books like Maus, the truth that might does not–despite US pretension otherwise–make right, that the answer to their problems is not blaming minorities, they might realize that the answer is in accepting the Other and banding together with them in common cause, to refuse to be divided and turned against the one who is Not Like Us.

Because regardless of your ethnicity, religion, gender, orientation, and so on, the only true other is the one who would destroy you for not being their ideal of a perfect, abled, cishet, person of the “correct” race and religion.

And now because I know there will inevitably be the usual fascists and neonazis whining that they deserve tolerance, too, I present you with the words of philosopher Karl Popper, who, much as Spiegleman before, makes my point far more elegantly than I could.

(Or as I sum up Popper’s words, “It is always morally and ethically correct to punch Nazis.”)

[thevagabondbard]

Ah yes. Censorship of the discussion of these issues. As if that weren’t the precise point, @staff

[suckmygirldickstaff]

I, once again would like to direct @staff to my username <3

[cletusthurstonbeauregard-deacti]

That's pretty much it, yeah

[sawasawako-archived]

[chilewithcarnage]

period.

[knifefightscene]

[lesbiansandgayssupporttheminers]

[killerchickadee]

I was reading an article about it this morning and this really rubbed me the wrong way.

How the hell do they not know how many people were working? All they have to do is look at when people punched in or out for their shift. There’s something very fishy and very callous about the whole thing.

[archosaurians]

Amazon knows how long it takes each worker to piss but suddenly when they have to be (publicly) responsible for killing their workers they have no idea how to keep track of them 💁

[roboco-san]

man I couldn't do twitter. on tumblr nobody gives a shit if u bully celebrities, on twitter it becomes a fucking national conversation for three days

[roboco-san]

john green's cock monologue never could have happened on twitter

[roboco-san]

god I wish that were me: a compilation

[milf-adjacent]

[korra-of-the-watertribe]

[ororomunroedontpullout]

Follow me on Twitter I suppose 🤪🤪

[sawasawako-archived]

nobody:

youtube:

[sawasawako-archived]

literally…

[lesblah]

idk what european needs to hear this but when ppl say "western culture" or "western society" they are talking abt u!! "the west" is not synonymous with north america!! it means imperialist powers!! yes they are talking about your german ass! all u white pip pip cheerio hon hon baguette mfs are not excluded from western society 😭 they are talking about you too

[americachavez]

can’t wait to watch timothée chalamet star in the charlie and the chocolate factory prequel titled WONKA as he finds an indigenous population and contracts them to lifelong servitude in his manufacturing plant where there are no safety regulations or government oversight

[americachavez]

hashtag girlboss

[americachavez]

[robotpussy]

candy colonialism the movie

[alarmingpenguin]

uhh

[jeaniefranklins]

“Here’s my life. My husband and I get up each morning at 7 o’clock and he showers while I make coffee. By the time he’s dressed I’m already sitting at my desk writing. He kisses me goodbye then leaves for the job where he makes good money, draws excellent benefits and gets many perks, such as travel, catered lunches and full reimbursement for the gym where I attend yoga midday. His career has allowed me to work only sporadically, as a consultant, in a field I enjoy. All that disclosure is crass, I know. I’m sorry. Because in this world where women will sit around discussing the various topiary shapes of their bikini waxes, the conversation about money (or privilege) is the one we never have. Why? I think it’s the Marie Antoinette syndrome: Those with privilege and luck don’t want the riffraff knowing the details. After all, if “those people” understood the differences in our lives, they might revolt. Or, God forbid, not see us as somehow more special, talented and/or deserving than them. There’s a special version of this masquerade that we writers put on. Two examples: I attended a packed reading (I’m talking 300+ people) about a year and a half ago. The author was very well-known, a magnificent nonfictionist who has, deservedly, won several big awards. He also happens to be the heir to a mammoth fortune. Mega-millions. In other words he’s a man who has never had to work one job, much less two. He has several children; I know, because they were at the reading with him, all lined up. I heard someone say they were all traveling with him, plus two nannies, on his worldwide tour. None of this takes away from his brilliance. Yet, when an audience member — young, wide-eyed, clearly not clued in — rose to ask him how he’d managed to spend 10 years writing his current masterpiece — What had he done to sustain himself and his family during that time? — he told her in a serious tone that it had been tough but he’d written a number of magazine articles to get by. I heard a titter pass through the half of the audience that knew the truth. But the author, impassive, moved on and left this woman thinking he’d supported his Manhattan life for a decade with a handful of pieces in the Nation and Salon. Example two. A reading in a different city, featuring a 30-ish woman whose debut novel had just appeared on the front page of the New York Times Book Review. I didn’t love the book (a coming-of-age story set among wealthy teenagers) but many people I respect thought it was great, so I defer. The author had herself attended one of the big, East Coast prep schools, while her parents were busy growing their careers on the New York literary scene. These were people — her parents — who traded Christmas cards with William Maxwell and had the Styrons over for dinner. She, the author, was their only beloved child. After prep school, she’d earned two creative writing degrees (Iowa plus an Ivy). Her first book was being heralded by editors and reviewers all over the country, many of whom had watched her grow up. It was a phenomenon even before it hit bookshelves. She was an immediate star. When (again) an audience member, clearly an undergrad, rose to ask this glamorous writer to what she attributed her success, the woman paused, then said that she had worked very, very hard and she’d had some good training, but she thought in looking back it was her decision never to have children that had allowed her to become a true artist. If you have kids, she explained to the group of desperate nubile writers, you have to choose between them and your writing. Keep it pure. Don’t let yourself be distracted by a baby’s cry. I was dumbfounded. I wanted to leap to my feet and shout. “Hello? Alice Munro! Doris Lessing! Joan Didion!” Of course, there are thousands of other extraordinary writers who managed to produce art despite motherhood. But the essential point was that, the quality of her book notwithstanding, this author’s chief advantage had nothing to do with her reproductive decisions. It was about connections. Straight up. She’d had them since birth. In my opinion, we do an enormous “let them eat cake” disservice to our community when we obfuscate the circumstances that help us write, publish and in some way succeed. I can’t claim the wealth of the first author (not even close); nor do I have the connections of the second. I don’t have their fame either. But I do have a huge advantage over the writer who is living paycheck to paycheck, or lonely and isolated, or dealing with a medical condition, or working a full-time job. How can I be so sure? Because I used to be poor, overworked and overwhelmed. And I produced zero books during that time. Throughout my 20s, I was married to an addict who tried valiantly (but failed, over and over) to stay straight. We had three children, one with autism, and lived in poverty for a long, wretched time. In my 30s I divorced the man because it was the only way out of constant crisis. For the next 10 years, I worked two jobs and raised my three kids alone, without child support or the involvement of their dad. I published my first novel at 39, but only after a teaching stint where I met some influential writers and three months living with my parents while I completed the first draft. After turning in that manuscript, I landed a pretty cushy magazine editor’s job. A year later, I met my second husband. For the first time I had a true partner, someone I could rely on who was there in every way for me and our kids. Life got easier. I produced a nonfiction book, a second novel and about 30 essays within a relatively short time. Today, I am essentially “sponsored” by this very loving man who shows up at the end of the day, asks me how the writing went, pours me a glass of wine, then takes me out to eat. He accompanies me when I travel 500 miles to do a 75-minute reading, manages my finances, and never complains that my dark, heady little books have resulted in low advances and rather modest sales. I completed my third novel in eight months flat. I started the book while on a lovely vacation. Then I wrote happily and relatively quickly because I had the time and the funding, as well as help from my husband, my agent and a very talented editor friend. Without all those advantages, I might be on page 52. OK, there’s mine. Now show me yours.”

—

Ann Bauer, ““Sponsored” by my husband: Why it’s a problem that writers never talk about where their money comes from”, http://www.salon.com/2015/01/25/sponsored_by_my_husband_why_its_a_problem_that_writers_never_talk_about_where_their_money_comes_from/ (via angrygirlcomics)

This is so important, especially for people like me, who are always hearing the radio station that plays “but you’re 26 and you are ~*~gifted~*~ and you can write, WHERE IS YOUR NOVEL” on constant loop.

It’s so important because I see younger people who can write going “oh yes, I can write, therefore I will be an English major, and write my book and live on that yes?? then I don’t have to do other jobs yes??” and you’re like “oh, no, honey, at least try to add another string to your bow, please believe that it will not happen quite like that” 

It’s so important not to be overly impressed by Walden because Thoreau’s mother continued to cook him food and wash his laundry while he was doing his self-sufficient wilderness-experiment “sit in a cabin and write” thing.

It’s so important because when you’re impressed by Lord of the Rings, remember that Tolkien had servants, a wife, university scouts and various underlings to do his admin, cook his meals, chase after him, and generally set up his life so that the only thing he had to do was wander around being vague and clever. In fact, the man could barely stand to show up at his own day job.

It’s important when you look at published fiction to remember that it is a non-random sample, and that it’s usually produced by the leisure class, so that most of what you study and consume is essentially wolves in captivity - not wolves in the wild - and does not reflect the experiences of all wolves.

Yeah. Important. Like that.

(via elodieunderglass)

[elfwreck]

Henry David Thoreau:

“I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear; nor did I wish to practise resignation, unless it was quite necessary. I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms, and, if it proved to be mean, why then to get the whole and genuine meanness of it, and publish its meanness to the world; or if it were sublime, to know it by experience, and be able to give a true account of it in my next excursion.”

Also Thoreau (emphasis added):

As is a favorite point of Thoreau’s critics, the wild life he lived was rather tame. His mother famously helped him out with laundry and food over the two years, and he had guests over regularly. And the land itself was not the rugged frontier. “In reality,” writes Kathryn Schulz in the New Yorker, “Walden Pond in 1845 was scarcely more off the grid, relative to contemporaneous society, than Prospect Park is today. The commuter train to Boston ran along its southwest side; in summer the place swarmed with picnickers and swimmers, while in winter it was frequented by ice cutters and skaters.” She adds that it would take Thoreau but twenty minutes to walk from his cabin to his family home, were we to confuse the writer with Robinson Crusoe.

Any time you hear about a “self-made man” or “independent woman” who attributes their success to “hard work” alone - ask yourself: Who does their laundry and dishes? Where did they live, and who paid the rent?

It is much, much easier to be creative if you don’t have to do housework or keep up with the bills.

[loumandliker]

Having your parents buy food for you is absolutely a form of generational wealth in action. If that makes you uncomfortable or upset, consider that it’s merely a semantic point and not a moral one. Generational wealth is only a hot word because we’re in a state of intense immoral wealth inequality, but it isn’t inherently bad, nor is parents supporting their children bad. It’s great when a parent provides food/access to food for their kids, but also obviously lots of parents can’t do that. Generational wealth is anything that’s passed down from one generation to the other, and should be something we help everybody build

disposable income is not the same as generational wealth. wealth is accumulated. if money gets put directly into filling basic needs it is not wealth it’s just cash.

[loumandliker]

we already have words like class privilege and social support system words mean things wealth is NOT “has money left over after bills” that’s called disposable income. y’all will do anything to avoid using words correctly. generational wealth is NOT “when you have enough money to buy groceries for someone if they were to find themself in a situation where they can’t do that” i am GOING to go insane.

[agnesmontague]

touches my lips to the mic. if you think “generational wealth” is when cash money changes hands between individuals of different generations you should not be talking about economic politics at all. your grandma handing you a fiver to go to the store is not generational wealth. it’s not a fucking estate jim it is called an allowance

[kaelio]

By the way, the book “Jackpot” (which starts off with fun stories about lottery winners before segueing to actual generational wealth and how it works down to granular tax policy) covers what generational wealth actually is, and–good news! It will actually piss you off far more once you actually know what is going on! So there’s no risk you’re going to come away as less of enemy of generational wealth than you are currently, but you will also know what you’re talking about!

[sawasawako-archived]

link to thread

[afrofication-deactivated2023080]

american whites were just caught on footage, chasing haitian migrants on horseback with whips in their hands. on horses. with whips.

and yet, black immigrants are still completely dismissed from all conversations about the violence against immigrants. for as long as i could remember, mestizo mexicans and central americans have been the face of immigration-related abuse… so much that people wrongly assume these are the sole victims of that violence.

haitian immigrants represent a disproportionate amount (44%!) of people currently detained in ICE quarters (as of 2020), and since haiti is overwhelmingly black, most - if not all - of those figures are black people. which means the attacks on haiti are automatically attacks on blackness.

it worries me a lot how haitian migrants are being treated and have been treated by not only the united states, but the rest of latin/caribbean/south america. there have been extended violences toward haiti from the entire americas for so long, it’s naive to say that it’s not related to how black the country is. to be black is to be unthought of, and unalive.

forced migration/extermination is genocide.

and it’s so telling that people won’t bother empathizing with the victims of forced migration unless they look a certain (non-black) way.

(if i find any haiti crowdfunds for haitian immigrants, i’ll add them)

[senshilegionnaire]

i went in the notes to see if crowdfund sources had been added in a reblog; the notes are full of "not all whites" bullshit.

(protip: if you are white in america, arguing 'does that make me racist?' then you need to examine yourself and why you personally feel attacked by a news story about antiblackness.)

here is a link to an aggregation of news stories concerning immigration to the US:

https://www.immigrationadvocates.org/nonprofit/news/archive.2021

News - Nonprofit Resource Center

Immigration Advocates Network is a free national online network that supports legal advocates working on behalf of immigrants' rights.

and here is a link to an article that may be a good place to start looking for who might be able to help crowdfund and advocate, though the thrust of the article regards post-earthquake aid within haiti:

https://haitiantimes.com/2021/09/01/more-donors-fund-grassroots-and-smaller-groups-for-2021-haiti-earthquake-relief/

More donors fund grassroots and smaller groups for 2021 Haiti earthquake relief - The Haitian Times

Amid skepticism of big-name non-governmental organizations like the American Red Cross, Haitians in the diaspora have coordinated directly w

[afrofication-deactivated2023080]

thank u so muchhh, i literally just woke up & usually i see crowdfunds on twitter but i have yet to see any. i did not expect this post to get more than 100 notes so i am a bit overwhelmed eeeek

[natalia-lafourcade]

Here are Black led organizations that are supporting Haitian migrants rn where people can donate.

https://undocublack.org/donate

http://haitianbridge.org

https://www.truealliancecenter.org

https://africans.us

https://t.co/1Bnpnr2Xgn

Black LGBTQIA+ Migrant Project (BLMP) - Transgender Law Center

Black LGBTQIA+ Migrant Project (BLMP) - Transgender Law Center

African Communities Together

African Communities Together

TRUE ALLIANCE CENTER

Advocating for social and economic justice for all Haitians living in greater Boston area and beyond.

General Donation — UndocuBlack Network

General Donation — UndocuBlack Network

[afrofication-deactivated2023080]

so appreciated !

[hugtheteadrinkthekitten]

I just found someone sharing this on twitter, so sorry that I don't have the link but omg

[causeknight]

Is the HOA an American thing? I feel like I’ve only heard about them in 2021.

[animeengineer]

HOAs arose after the Jim Crow laws and redlining that kept blacks out of white neighborhoods were judged unconstitutional.

Basically they’re entities that charge everyone in a neighborhood dues, and enforce a thick set of standards regarding how your home is built, what kind of fences you have, what color your house is painted, what you can have in the front yard and how often you mow, and so on.

If you break their rules, they can fine you or worse. For example, if you don’t mow your lawn, they can send you a notice, then if you haven’t mowed by the deadline, they can call in someone to mow your lawn for you and stick you with the bill plus the fine. If you don’t pay, they might try to put a lien on your house.

Needless to say, they enforced the rules a lot more harshly on people that they didn’t want in the neighborhood, such as minorities.

[curiousorigins]

HOAs were 100% made to keep black working class people out of affluent white neighborhoods. They also have an insane amount of power in most places. They can literally take your property from you.

If you want a very in-depth look at how HOAs and all that pretty much enforces former Jim Crow laws as they fell I have 2 books that are worth reading.

First one is in-depth analysis about how workers were treated and how the factory system changed cities. Accidentally created horrible neighborhoods to live in because of quick construction etc.

"Eight Hours For What We Will Workers & Leisure in an industrial city, 1870-1920" by Roy Rosenzweig

And

For more specific racial analysis and systematic racism and the fact that it all still exists to this day, it goes especially hard on HOAs. Also explains how fighting in WWII. Empowered Soldiers of Color and led to the Civil Rights Movement gaining momentum.

"The Origins of the Urban Crisis Race and Inequality in Post-war Detroit."

By Thomas J. Sugrue.

So yeah. They're both worth reading. But a bit dry.

[stuffman]

People have written a lot of touchy-feely pieces on this subject but I thought I’d get right to the heart of the matter

[sqbr]

[The artist, putting a simple cake next to a much fancier one: “Aw man, that guy’s cake is way better than mine.” The Audience, gleefully holding up a knife and fork “HOLY SHIT! TWO CAKES!”]

[elvencantation]

additions from the og artist (credit)

[ottermatopoeia]

remember: your feelings of inadequacy are often projection and not reality

[dyke-dyke-goose]

Dan Levy is giving elementary school art project but I love it

[lucdarling]

It’s directly inspired by a David Wojnarowicz piece called “F*ck You F*ggot F*cker”. Wojnarowicz was an ACT UP member and died of AIDS in July 1992. (x)