the pure of heart do not require a "car" and "driver's license" to travel
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Keni
trying on a metaphor
No title available
Jules of Nature

JBB: An Artblog!
DEAR READER
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
Acquired Stardust

No title available
art blog(derogatory)
Today's Document

pixel skylines
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Claire Keane
tumblr dot com
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

Kaledo Art
RMH
Three Goblin Art

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from Ireland

seen from Germany
seen from Türkiye

seen from United States

seen from Algeria
seen from Netherlands

seen from Mauritius
seen from Canada

seen from United Kingdom
seen from France

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Germany
@fakealanhart
the pure of heart do not require a "car" and "driver's license" to travel
Thought Tumblr would appreciate this artwork I saw at the flea market today
there’s no specific reason i enjoy my favourite themes in media
it's been observed many times before but man it is kind of funny that Americans were so galled about the idea of foreign interference in the presidential election. Fuckkkkkk who would do something like that... Truly shameful behavior what kind of monstrous government would do something like that
can we bring back the term "fair-weather friend" bc I feel like if fair-weather friends got called that more this whole argument about whether or not you should be there for your friends when it's inconvenient/at what point of personal inconvenience it's ok to bail on your friends would kinda fall apart bc like. we literally have a word for "friend who's only there when you don't need something from them" because the baseline expectation is that a friend should be there even when it sucks. like we used to make fun of people for bailing on their friends.
Every diaspora reactionary cheering on regime change wouldn’t find it as funny if a foreign power like China bombed American schools because our police and federal agents kill protesters, a crime they’ve absolutely been guilty of.
Wonder why there’s a double standard here, is bombing children not bad? Is it only acceptable to bomb children when it overlaps with America’s imperialist desires to control the governments, people and resources of a region? Is that why it’s acceptable to bomb children in Gaza and Iran but the idea that any government would bomb our nation for its crimes against its people is so absurd as to be unthinkable, impossible, politically laughable? Why?
There's a tendency in IR discourse that I've noticed where the fact that many so-called “authoritarian regimes” curtail what is often labelled as the “freedom of speech” of individuals is framed as evidence of some innate illegitimacy, often presented as a desperate gambit to maintain the power of those in control. I think this is a fundamental mistake. So-called “democratic” countries can afford free speech because they exist within a normative hierarchy stabilised by international institutions, the primacy of their economic systems, and, of course, an as yet unchallenged position within the world order. This makes them more resilient to ideological destabilisation, not because of any innate moral superiority of their systems or ideologies, but because they occupy a materially and normatively privileged position within a particular historical context. As the material power of this world order declines, its normative power follows suit, and this is already evident as states long self-styled as bastions of free speech become less willing to tolerate dissent, from the US to Germany, while at the same time states considered repressive begin experimenting with gradually opening space for discourse.
Do you believe that Jewish people are the one and only group of natives who do not deserve to live in their origin country? Do you think land back does not apply to them? Do you think only Palestinians have the right to self determination and their homeland? Do you know that the history is that both groups are indigenous and all historical evidence demonstrates that?
Do you not understand what the word native mean? Do you think it's okay to murder Palestinians and starve children to death because you some guy from Poland made Aliyah and now he thinks he's "native"
There are literal converts who will go to Israel and steal land from Palestinians. There is constantly settler violence happening against Palestinians
Stop trying to excuse the genocide especially with words you don't understand
Land back is when Shlomo from Williamsburg joins the IDF so he can kill Palestinians and take their land and then protest for the right to rape prisoners
And no none of this applies to Israelis. You can't be a settler colonial project and claim to be indigenous. That's not how it works
Land back is when the Israeli government offers you tax benefits, monetary incentives, and the protection of the IDF to move from Europe to Israel so you can displace an indigenous family in Palestine.
Land back is also when you destroy millions of olive trees since 1967 and kill Palestinian farmers who have been taking care of this land for generations
Zionism makes you stupid
Being anti-USA is the bare minimum for legitimate leftists I'm not even kidding
If criminals don't get to have human rights, then the people in charge of deciding what a criminal is get to decide who is and is not human. Do you understand? Is this not blindingly obvious? Do you care?
Or do you assume you will always be "one of the good ones"?
I read this column by Chris Hedges that I wanted to share.
He makes a great argument about how Zionists have weaponized the holocaust and transformed it into an industry that uses it to justify the actions of Israel instead of using it to learn from history.
I agree with how he points out the fact that Holocaust institutions and scholars have largely failed to condemn the genocide in Gaza and turned "Never Again" into "Never again for Jews"
It's a great read and there is also this video that is worth watching
not to be a dirty commie or anything but i don't think any one person should have enough money to solve world hunger and then get to decide not to
I still can't stop thinking about this even though it's months gone but I just have to say it and it will always be indicative of how Americans, leftists or not, will always fall short of seeing non Americans as humans.
One of the most grotesque things about the reaction to Khamenei’s assassination was watching Americans immediately pivot into fantasising about a “secular Iran” or a “free Iran” before the blood had even dried.
Not mourning the dead. Not acknowledging the 160 schoolgirls killed. Not reckoning with the fact that this violence was inflicted on actual human beings. Just instantly launching into imperial wish-fulfilment: maybe NOW Iran can become the version of the country WE want it to be.
And it revealed something deeply ugly about how Americans engage with the rest of the world politically. Entire countries only exist to them as symbols in their own ideological narratives. Iran is not a real place full of people with complicated political histories, internal movements, contradictions, factions, and trauma. It becomes a blank screen for western projection: oppressed women waiting for western liberation, secular democracy waiting to be “unlocked,” grateful citizens waiting to be saved through bombs and assassinations.
It is such a profoundly unserious and anti-intellectual way to understand politics. People genuinely talk about regime collapse like they are discussing a season finale instead of the destabilisation of an 90+ million person country with enormous ethnic, religious, regional, and geopolitical complexity. They do not study history. They do not learn from Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, or literally any other intervention where western fantasies about liberation produced mass death and instability. They reduce politics to aesthetics: “religious government bad, secular government good,” as though societies can simply be traumatically shocked into becoming western liberal democracies overnight.
But more than stupidity, it was the speed of the dehumanisation that was horrifying. Americans could not even pause their fantasies long enough to process the bloodshed THEY were celebrating. The deaths themselves became secondary to the imagined outcome. The massacre was reframed as potentially “worth it” if it created the Iran they wanted to see.
That is the logic of empire in its purest form: other people’s suffering becomes acceptable, even exciting, if it can be turned into political transformation desirable to the west.
And the sickest part is how casually this mindset appears. People say these things like they are discussing sports trades or fictional worldbuilding, completely detached from the reality that the “birth” of their ideal secular state would come through terror, mourning, orphaned children, destroyed families, and mass instability.
The ideal image they had of a “free Iran” was built, in their minds, directly on top of the bodies they helped justify.
every day it just concerns me how little compassion people have. no compassion for those living in the global south. no compassion for immigrants. no compassion for disabled ppl. no compassion for addicts. no compassion for prisoners. no compassion for children. like holy shit ...
i made a separate post about this but actually there are plenty of people cough white people who care about animals more than they ever do human people . not what i'm talking about make your own post
no rest for me and im not even that wicked ?