JBB: An Artblog!
Sade Olutola
No title available
Discoholic 🪩
cherry valley forever
Andulka
todays bird
No title available
Three Goblin Art
trying on a metaphor
祝日 / Permanent Vacation
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
tumblr dot com
🪼
Monterey Bay Aquarium
YOU ARE THE REASON
@theartofmadeline
ojovivo
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Aqua Utopia｜海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Georgia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from United States
@blergityblargh
Basically i think you either choose salvadore allende or vladimir lenin as your model, on the left. Even if you don't think you've chosen, you have (probably you've chosen salvadore allende).
are you salvadore allende or vladimir lenin?
Allende
Lenin
I'm not on the left
For anyone that even cares
Peaceful Labour Demonstration Met with Violent Escalation by the Indonesian Government
Civilians in several cities in Indonesia have been protesting on the streets, in response to our House of Representatives insensitive and derogatory remarks amidst difficult economic climate.
It was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration led by laborers and university students, but our government choose to ignore and even violently escalating it with police brutality + shooting tear gas. What sparked a nationwide outrage was during 28 August protest in the evening, one of the armored police/soldier truck sped up intending to run over protestors and it struck over a Gojek driver (ride hailing driver, similar to Uber) that fell when crossing the road amidst the chaos. The truck did stop but decided to ram the gas and ran over him when he's trying to stand, with other protestors shouting for them to stop.
The Gojek driver's name is Affan Kurniawan. He's just 21 years old, the breadwinner of his family. He lived with seven other people in a cramped small rented room. He was not even participating in the demonstration, at the time of his death he was WORKING. He was trying to complete a food delivery order before he was killed.
This incident was documented clear as day with several videos from different povs. Here's the most prominent one.
In response to Affan's death, nationwide protests are held on the following day. (29 August)
The protests continued even today on 30th August and it keeps on escalating. The government is now trying to frame the protesters as violent anarchists, they're trying to use the same tactic as the '98 tragedy. They've been deploying provocators and intels to riot and burn public transport station, even going as far as raiding several (decoy) houses that belongs to members of the House of Representatives. They've also taken several hostages, reports of kidnapping as per 28 August is 400+.
They have been turning off electricity access in several parts of Jakarta and just greenlit snipers and soldiers to shoot protestors on the head with rubber bullets. There's already several victims.
They've also blocked access to TikTok live and even tried to erase/take down several of video proof of police brutality. Police are now sweeping several areas and civilians are alerting each other to be careful and to stay safe and not answer the door.
So yes. Please pray and check up on your friend that lives in Indonesia. I fear that there's going to be a military emergency implemented by our warcrime president. If possible please help save the video proofs because our government are cracking down to erase any proof of violence.
Here's more background information about the events that leads to the demonstration:
Video explanation from Al Jazeera that interviewed one of us:
This is an attempted colour revolution, please don't risk your life to do regime change for the US government
If you want to stand against US imperialism you should be on our side, not the government's. Our government is a fucking US-backed regime for fuck's sake!
Outside of that, what do you suggest we do? Sit pretty as they kill people on the streets and raise taxes by 400-1000% while teachers get paid $60 every 3 months as the govvy buys another trillion worth of tanks and buy their 30th personal sports car funded by our taxes?
Talking about "Colour Revolution", that is defined specifically by a series of revolutions in previously Soviet/Red states, resulting in the installation a "western democracy" system. If you're worried about the US having influence in Indonesia you're like a century too late. This regime IS already US-backed.
Some quick history for you bc it doesn't seem you know any:
Indonesia is already a democratic republic country 😭💀 Cmon now, this takes like 3 seconds to look up. What else are they gonna install here? western democracy came pre-installed with the country be fr now
Indonesia is not a post-soviet state. If anything they had the fucking US already put their grubby little hands all over the government all the way back in the 40s before they even got their independence,
the CIA put their grubby little hands in there again during 50s-60s with the aim to wipe out any signs of communism anywhere by using military personnels, causing a dictatorship that lasted till 1998. Guess which military man was involved in all this btw? Indonesia's current prezzie! 🎉🎉🎉Seriously, just look him up. He's literally infamous bc of it.
The president (and by extension the government) is STILL a fucking US glazer. The prezzie literally groveled by Trump's side to get tariff cuts by selling the civilian's fucking data. Remember trump talking about other countries begging him to lower the tarrifs? yeah? guess which fucking prezzie did that. 🤦♀️
So come on now, use a bit of critical thinking here. I know this is the piss on the poor website but think for a sec, Who is being backed by the US here? The guy who was already working with the CIA's agenda and groveled by the US president? Or a bunch of random people just trying to stay alive and prevent the 1960s-1998 from happening again?? pake uteg njir
I started watching the video the person crying "colour revolution" linked to, and they're calling the movement in Serbia a colour revolution too. Like????
I have to go to work, so I'll probably finish watching it later, but from the little I watched about Indonesia, the logic seems to be that because the movement there is unorganized and has engaged in burning parliament buildings and looting politician's mansions that's why it's bad. Like buddy, that just means that it's elemental. That just means that people are so angry there's nothing holding them back anymore.
Isaac Chotiner interviews a former Biden-Harris official who tries to sell him on what a great job the Biden-Harris administration did with Gaza, which goes a little awry when the Biden-Harris attempt to rewrite history hinges on "we did a good job only getting the right children killed, not the wrong children".
Teen Killed In U.S. Drone Strike Should Have 'More Responsible Father,' Obama Campaign Official Says
y’all really recommend books like: title, there are gay characters, enemies to lovers, young adult, written by poc
not once do i ever see a summary
What more info do you need?
WHAT DO U MENA SUMMARY WHAT ELSE MATTERS ITS GAY POC AND ENEMIES TO LOVERS HOW OFTEN DO U CONE ACROSS THAT
i want to know what its about mainly. is it a romance? is there plot besides the romance? is it realistic fiction? sci fi? fantasy? historical? future? alternate history? whats the tone? what are the themes? what are the main characters’ NAMES?
“GAY AND/OR RACIALLY DIVERSE” IS NOT A GENRE. nor is it an indicator of quality
do you know how many times I’ve been recommended a book solely because “it’s queer fantasy!”
do you know how many times those books have been so poorly written that I couldn’t finish them
Mostly, I want to know the tone. A 19th century war story isn’t gonna do it for me when I’m in the mood for a lighthearted austenesque romance - and those are both historical. A star warsy space romp isn’t gonna do it if I want to read about interplanetary political negotiations - and those are both sci fi. A fun gratuitious don’t-think-about-it-too-hard action story is not the same as a dark and complicated mob drama. A suspenseful thriller will bore me if I’m looking for a fast paced spy novel.
not providing a summary literally just shows how you treat marginalized people and their representation as this token woke thing that you can show off like a shiny trophy. no, people aren’t going to read something just because it has representation! that’s not how it works!
Artist bio by Anna Daliza
people love to find progressive ways to say we should all be arranged into separate groups and try our hardest to not relate to one another
Anti public defender sentiment NOW of all times has GOT to be a psyop and I’m not being hyperbolic
‘You’re arguing to give rapists a lighter sentence you’re arguing for clients you know are guilty’ you are arguing for a state that can get away with whatever it wants so long as it calls someone a rapist. You are arguing that the state only needs to meet its burden of proof for innocent clients. You cannot be this stupid, I refuse to believe it.
If people want to be mad at individuals, be mad at misogynistic judges, who are the ones actually making decisions.
Ultimately, though, the legal system is adversarial. It is based on the idea that if two sides argue really hard, the truth will prevail. It's not set up to protect victims. If you want a legal system that treats victims well, you're going to have to fight for a revolution and an entirely different form of governance. Not attack the people whose job it is to try to ensure the current system works.
Do you think someone can be considered a leftist if they *don't* support the overthrow of capitalism by the working class?
no
yes
No nuance.
Please feel free to reblog with your reasoning
Do you think someone can be considered a leftist if they *don't* support the overthrow of capitalism by the working class?
no
yes
No nuance.
Wild delusions going on in liberal land. Someone tell these people that the Soviet union has not existed for 35 years. And I know that's probably a lot for them to absorb, but then they should probably also be informed that the US has more than enough problems on its own to give rise to Trump organically.
Let's set the record straight about the Canadian election
because I've seen a lot of terrible takes and it's starting to bug me.
Myth 1: This was a huge defeat for the Conservatives
The way this is presented is that while Justin Trudeau was Prime Minister, the Conservatives had a 25-point lead over the Liberals. But then Trudeau resigned, Trump started making threats, and the Liberals made a miraculous recovery to win their fourth consecutive term in government.
This is true. But the Conservatives did not do badly by any stretch of the imagination.
In 2015, when Justin Trudeau's Liberals won a majority government, he won 39.5% of the popular vote. When Stephen Harper's Conservatives won a majority in 2011, they had 39.6% of the popular vote.
In this election, the Liberals won 43.7% of the popular vote. Normally that would mean that they won a crushing majority of seats. But they won a minority. The Conservatives got 41.3% of the popular vote, which also would be enough to win a majority in normal times. And they did pick up 24 seats in the election,
The big story isn't that the Conservatives did badly, because they didn't. The big story is that the NDP (the labour/social democrat-ish party) absolutely collapsed in this election, losing seats to both the Liberals and Conservatives. They went from 24 seats to just 7 seats. They lost official party status.
The Liberals rebounded, not because they won Conservative supporters, but because they siphoned support from the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois (the Quebec nationalist party) (who went from 34 to 23 seats).
That's because there were two issues in this election: Donald Trump and the cost of living.
During the last Parliament, the NDP entered into an agreement with Trudeau's minority government to prop them up in return for some very very limited reforms that the Liberals probably would have done anyways. The NDP kept the Liberals in power through the cost of living crisis, through the genocide in Gaza, through the Liberals repeatedly shutting down important strikes (dock workers, rail workers, postal workers). They took on responsibility for a government that was widely unpopular.
Then Trudeau resigned, Mark Carney reverse his most unpopular policies (Carbon tax, Capital gains tax), and Trump instituted tariffs against Canada. The Liberals were able to revamp their image and appeal to people who were scared of Trump, while the NDP bore responsibility for the previous government. And those who were voting based on worries about the cost of living voted Conservative.
The NDP actually lost more seats to the Conservatives than to the Liberals, including the manufacturing regions that have been hit the worst by the trade war. The NDP usually gets a majority of the support from union members and youth, but this time they lost both of those demographics to the Conservatives. Because the Conservatives were the only ones talking about the working class (opportunistically), and the only ones who seemed to be at all anti-establishment (rhetorically).
And this is not going to be a stable government for the Liberals. They're a minority government, those usually last 18-36 months. And come next election, the Conservatives will be well-placed to win.
As a side note, there's a lot of people talking about how Pierre Poilievre (Conservative leader) lost his seat. And yes, it's funny and satisfying. But also it's been way overblown. He's just going to run in a by-election for a safe Conservative seat, it doesn't change anything.
Myth 2: Pierre Poilievre/The Conservatives are fascists
I honestly feel like I'm in the twilight zone with the way some people talk about Poilievre.
He's just a normal conservative. He's been a parliamentarian his entire adult life. He was a member of Stephen Harper's cabinet. He's an establishment politician who jumped on the right-populist bandwagon at the time of the trucker convoy, and then got a makeover and added a few catchy slogans ("boots not suits" "the have-nots vs. the have-yachts").
Are there extremists who vote Conservative? Yes. But the strategy of the Conservative party when it comes to extreme social conservatives (going back to Harper's day, and Poilievre is a Harper-ite) is to use them for their votes and then tell them to shut up. You see this with Poilievre, that he was winning based on talking about the cost-of-living crisis, so he didn't need to get into culture war stuff, and he avoided it.
And you need to look at who voted Conservative: youth, workers, and immigrants. Poilievre is popular because he (demagogically) talks about the fact that people's lives are getting worse, and everyone is sick of the Liberals.
Myth 3: The Liberals are any better
First of all, let's be really clear about what the Liberals are. They've been in power for most of Canada's history. They're nicknamed "the natural governing pary". They are the preferred party of Canadian capitalism.
They're what in political science is called a "brokerage party". That means that they don't stand for anything ideologically, but operate solely on the basis of what will get theme elected. They are not a left party, and have never been a left party.
And the Liberals, being the main party of Canadian capitalism, have presided over some of the worst stuff that Canadian capitalism is responsible for. They were huge supporters of the creation of Israel. They presided over the 60s scoop. Federally, they implemented the worst cuts in Canadian history in the 1990s. Recently, they've shut down every major strike in the past few years. And that's just off the top of my head.
Even under Carney, and he's only been around a couple of months, the Liberals are making massive cuts to Indigenous support programs, and sending weapons to Israel and lying about it.
In this election specifically, Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre's platforms were *extremely* similar. Before the election even got underway, Carney implemented three of the promises that Poilievre was running on (ending the carbon tax, stopping the capital gains tax, ending federal oversight of development projects). Poilievre accused the Liberals of stealing his platform, even.
Both the Liberals and Conservatives are talking about limiting immigration and sending migrants out of the country, they're both talking about "encouraging investment" (payouts to business), and they're both talking about balancing the budget.
The reason why they're so similar is that in times of economic crisis, the ruling class has less room to manoeuver. Canada is facing a productivity crisis, runaway deficits, and now the trade war. From the point of view of the ruling class, the main task is to balance the budget. That will necessarily mean making cuts to social spending.
That's the ultimate point of this post: The Liberals and the Conservatives are both enemies, and both need to be treated as such.
Helpful charts:
Canada, Australia, and Aotearoa have all seen their right-wing parties collapse in popularity since Trump took over.
We were headed for a hard-right turn, but this shift is absolutely unprecedented in modern times. The stark reality of a right wing nationalist future really got people to pay attention.
Unfortunately, it's at the cost of the millions of us in the US who will now suffer
This is a misrepresentation of what happened in Canada, which helps no one.
You can see from the graph that yes, support for the Conservatives dropped, but most of the Liberal's recovery was due to syphoning support from the NDP (the labour/social-democratic party) and the Bloc Quebecois (Quebec nationalist party). The Conservatives gained 24 seats and got their highest share of the popular vote since 1988. Hardly a collapse.
What happened is that that people who were scared of Trump voted Liberal, and the people worried about the cost of living voted Conservative.
The lesson from the Canadian election is that if lefties support the liberals, like how the NDP propped up the Liberal party for the past several years, then they will lose all credibility in the eyes of working class, leaving the road open to right-wing populists.
Let's set the record straight about the Canadian election
because I've seen a lot of terrible takes and it's starting to bug me.
Myth 1: This was a huge defeat for the Conservatives
The way this is presented is that while Justin Trudeau was Prime Minister, the Conservatives had a 25-point lead over the Liberals. But then Trudeau resigned, Trump started making threats, and the Liberals made a miraculous recovery to win their fourth consecutive term in government.
This is true. But the Conservatives did not do badly by any stretch of the imagination.
In 2015, when Justin Trudeau's Liberals won a majority government, he won 39.5% of the popular vote. When Stephen Harper's Conservatives won a majority in 2011, they had 39.6% of the popular vote.
In this election, the Liberals won 43.7% of the popular vote. Normally that would mean that they won a crushing majority of seats. But they won a minority. The Conservatives got 41.3% of the popular vote, which also would be enough to win a majority in normal times. And they did pick up 24 seats in the election.
The big story isn't that the Conservatives did badly, because they didn't. The big story is that the NDP (the labour/social democrat-ish party) absolutely collapsed in this election, losing seats to both the Liberals and Conservatives. They went from 24 seats to just 7 seats. They lost official party status.
The Liberals rebounded, not because they won Conservative supporters, but because they siphoned support from the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois (the Quebec nationalist party) (who went from 34 to 23 seats).
That's because there were two issues in this election: Donald Trump and the cost of living.
During the last Parliament, the NDP entered into an agreement with Trudeau's minority government to prop them up in return for some very very limited reforms that the Liberals probably would have done anyways. The NDP kept the Liberals in power through the cost of living crisis, through the genocide in Gaza, through the Liberals repeatedly shutting down important strikes (dock workers, rail workers, postal workers). They took on responsibility for a government that was widely unpopular.
Then Trudeau resigned, Mark Carney reversed his most unpopular policies (Carbon tax, Capital gains tax), and Trump instituted tariffs against Canada. The Liberals were able to revamp their image and appeal to people who were scared of Trump, while the NDP bore responsibility for the previous government. And those who were voting based on worries about the cost of living voted Conservative.
The NDP actually lost more seats to the Conservatives than to the Liberals, including the manufacturing regions that have been hit the worst by the trade war. The NDP usually gets a majority of the support from union members and youth, but this time they lost both of those demographics to the Conservatives. Because the Conservatives were the only ones talking about the working class (opportunistically), and the only ones who seemed to be at all anti-establishment (rhetorically).
And this is not going to be a stable government for the Liberals. They're a minority government, those usually last 18-36 months. And come next election, the Conservatives will be well-placed to win.
As a side note, there's a lot of people talking about how Pierre Poilievre (Conservative leader) lost his seat. And yes, it's funny and satisfying. But also it's been way overblown. He's just going to run in a by-election for a safe Conservative seat, it doesn't change anything.
Myth 2: Pierre Poilievre/The Conservatives are fascists
I honestly feel like I'm in the twilight zone with the way some people talk about Poilievre.
He's just a normal conservative. He's been a parliamentarian his entire adult life. He was a member of Stephen Harper's cabinet. He's an establishment politician who jumped on the right-populist bandwagon at the time of the trucker convoy, and then got a makeover and added a few catchy slogans ("boots not suits" "the have-nots vs. the have-yachts").
Are there extremists who vote Conservative? Yes. But the strategy of the Conservative party when it comes to extreme social conservatives (going back to Harper's day, and Poilievre is a Harper-ite) is to use them for their votes and then tell them to shut up. You see this with Poilievre, that he was winning based on talking about the cost-of-living crisis, so he didn't need to get into culture war stuff, and he avoided it.
And you need to look at who voted Conservative: youth, workers, and immigrants. Poilievre is popular because he (demagogically) talks about the fact that people's lives are getting worse, and everyone is sick of the Liberals.
Myth 3: The Liberals are any better
First of all, let's be really clear about what the Liberals are. They've been in power for most of Canada's history. They're nicknamed "the natural governing pary". They are the preferred party of Canadian capitalism.
They're what in political science is called a "brokerage party". That means that they don't stand for anything ideologically, but operate solely on the basis of what will get them elected. They are not a left party, and have never been a left party.
And the Liberals, being the main party of Canadian capitalism, have presided over some of the worst stuff that Canadian capitalism is responsible for. They were huge supporters of the creation of Israel. They presided over the 60s scoop. Federally, they implemented the worst cuts in Canadian history in the 1990s. Recently, they've shut down every major strike in the past few years. And that's just off the top of my head.
Even under Carney, and he's only been around a couple of months, the Liberals are making massive cuts to Indigenous support programs, and sending weapons to Israel and lying about it.
In this election specifically, Mark Carney and Pierre Poilievre's platforms were *extremely* similar. Before the election even got underway, Carney implemented three of the promises that Poilievre was running on (ending the carbon tax, stopping the capital gains tax, ending federal oversight of development projects). Poilievre accused the Liberals of stealing his platform, even.
Both the Liberals and Conservatives are talking about limiting immigration and sending migrants out of the country, they're both talking about "encouraging investment" (payouts to business), and they're both talking about balancing the budget.
The reason why they're so similar is that in times of economic crisis, the ruling class has less room to manoeuver. Canada is facing a productivity crisis, runaway deficits, and now the trade war. From the point of view of the ruling class, the main task is to balance the budget. That will necessarily mean making cuts to social spending, whether it’s the Liberals or Conservatives in government.
That's the ultimate point of this post: The Liberals and the Conservatives are both our enemies, and both need to be treated as such.
Every time lesser evilism is practiced, it just lays the groundwork for the return of the far right on a stronger basis.
Lesser evilism doesn't mean choosing your enemy, it means aligning yourself with the enemy.
Anyone who fights for the establishment is not "left wing"
Really excellent analysis of the entire war
The fate of the NDP in the Canadian election is such a clear example of where lesser-evilism gets you.
The NDP is the labour party equivalent in Canada. They had socialism in their constitution until about 15 years ago. The most successful federal election for them ever was in 2011 when people were sick to death of the Liberals and turned to the NDP as the most radical thing available.
Now they've lost so many seats that they've lost official party status. Because they tied themselves to the Liberals, they propped up Trudeau, they aligned themselves with the establishment. So in the election, anyone who wanted the Liberals voted for the Liberals, and anyone who was sick of the establishment voted Conservative.
The NDP lost the youth vote for the first time in forever. The NDP is the party founded by unions, and they lost the union vote. And they lost both demographics to the Conservatives! Because Poilievre was the one actually talking about the working class and the cost-of-living crisis. Now they don't have official party status anymore, which means they lose funding, and they don't get the same rights in Parliament.
Jagmeet Singh, the (now former) NDP leader, said about propping up the Liberals, that he could have brought them down and gained a lot of votes, but that he put the fate of the country ahead of the fate of his party. Insane thing to say. If you actually believe that your party has the right ideas then it's your duty to win the widest layer of the population over to them as possible. He fucked up deeply and destroyed his party for what?
Carney's agenda is virtually indistinguishable from Poilievre. He's going to do the same tax cuts. He's going to carry out the same attacks on social programs. He's already making major cuts to supports for Indigenous communities. He's been sending arms to Israel, while lying about it. He's going to be syphoning money off into the military. The literal only difference between them is that the ruling class is more comfortable with Carney because they know him, while Poilievre used anti-establishment rhetoric to get popular and they weren't a fan of that.
People always argue that lesser-evilism is about "choosing which enemy you'd rather fight." I've seen people say that they have an easier time fighting under the Liberals than the Conservatives. When a) there is so little daylight between the two. b) The Liberals are literally nicknamed "the ruling party of Canada". They've been in power most of the time. They're the preferred representatives of the ruling class and the main enemy.
And c) most importantly. Will the NDP have an easier time fighting after supporting the Liberals? No, they've totally undermined their ability to fight. They've dramatically lowered their capacity to get anything done. Because lesser-evilism is not about "choosing your enemy" it's about aligning with the enemy in the eyes of the people you're trying to win over. You're not better able to fight the establishment because the people who actually want to do that see you as part of the establishment. You've cratered any credibility you might have had as a fighter.
You've sold tomorrow for today, and not for a very good today either.
