Sade Olutola

Product Placement

Kiana Khansmith

Kaledo Art
Claire Keane

❣ Chile in a Photography ❣
No title available
DEAR READER

Andulka
Cosimo Galluzzi

Discoholic 🪩

JBB: An Artblog!
cherry valley forever
ojovivo
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸
we're not kids anymore.
AnasAbdin
Cosmic Funnies
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
KIROKAZE
seen from United States
seen from Singapore
seen from United States

seen from China

seen from China
seen from United States

seen from Romania
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Canada

seen from Israel
seen from United States

seen from Morocco
seen from United States

seen from United States
@muttonstudies
I'm really trying hard to be a "It's everyone's first time learning something everyday" kind of guy but also if you don't know shit and you know you're, for whatever reason, a person who doesn't have context about something, why fucking talk. Like why are you talking. If you know you don't know what's being discussed why are you opining about it and getting confused when everyone is like, shut your empty headed mouth for the love of god? Are you ALSO learning for the first time that this is insufferable?? As though half the time these people aren't also insufferable pedants who'd blow a gasket if someone started talking about their loser hobbies wrong
"Here are my thoughts on this topic"
"You are completely off, you have gotten multiple basic facts wrong, you also lack x and y context"
"Well I didn't know that because I don't really involve myself in this topic" THEN SHUT UPPPPPPP OH MY GODDDDDDD
Only a general women's movement has the power to liberate trans women, but only a union of trans women organized within such a movement has the power to ensure that it does liberate trans women. Likewise, only a proletarian socialist movement has the power to liberate women in general, but only a general union of women organized within the proletarian movement has the power to ensure that it does liberate women.
As an oppressed people, we cannot rely on the privileged classes to discover our own interests, but as a minority we also cannot rely on our independent forces to overthrow such powerful systems. A strategic alliance of all oppressed people's is needed to build socialism, whilst autonomous unions of oppressed people are needed to protect ourselves and advocate for our interests within the coalition.
Do not mistake the failures of particular movements in the US for an indication of the general impossibility of such a strategic alliance. The reactionary hegemony is a temporary phenomenon, whilst class struggle is the permanent condition of class society. No movement will appear if we don't build it, but history is on our side.
we need free the nipple back and we need to lead with trans women this time
Leaf your leaves on the ground (no, seriously.) They provide so much for bugs, places to lay eggs places to hibernate. This comic does a great job at showing WHY we don't see our little friends as often, because our systems and social expectations are anti-earth and anti-life. Don't eradicate your friends (maybe just that one) let the leaves lay
Man and beast should absolutely fuse into one perfect being
so howcome we're never accusing "afab only" queer spaces of dividing the community?
we got signs all over the "queer community" that basically say "no trans women." that's not division?
a lot of you are more offended at being told trans women make less money than you than you are at naked discrimination against trans women in your own communities
Can you fucking TMEs stop with this fucking shit oh my fucking hell
"I've hit the stage of transition where I notice that everyone is transmisogynistic but I get not to care because it doesn't affect me :3"
Salman Toor (Pakistani, 1983), Skincare, 2023. Oil on panel, 18 x 24 in.
the fact that "eco" and "ethical" are two separate concerns in the global north, and that "eco" is a much more popular concern, with many "eco" products being made in actual sweatshops, is a big part of why i am The Joker
if you think this is an exaggeration or splitting hairs where it doesn't matter:
i used to work at a Local Organic Produce store that's popular with the lefties in my city who are interested in food justice. i quit for a lot of reasons, mostly the boss, but something i will always remember is one of our suppliers coming in to drop off produce, being told her check wasn't ready, and her laughing and responding it didn't matter -- even a low bank account was more than enough to pay the migrants who picked her produce. i am not filling in any blanks here. she said this.
after quitting, this was a common story i told people about my time there. some then became annoyed at me, acting like i was a wokescold trying to undermine the store's "eco" mission with unrelated "ethical" concerns. but, like -- if food justice isn't for the people making food, who the fuck is it for?
like, don't get me wrong. my contention here is that the things go hand in hand, and that something which is unethical isn't actually eco. after all, humans are a part of the fucking ecosystem, and if a product can only be made by unsustainably exploiting humans, then it's unsustainable. doesn't matter which chemicals were used in making it, or whether or not animals were factory farmed.
Being anti-USA is the bare minimum for legitimate leftists I'm not even kidding
One thing that deeply irritates me is the way some American leftists talk about U.S veterans and imperial violence, because beneath all the Marxist language there is often this unspoken assumption that the rest of the world is supposed to emotionally process American empire in a way that is convenient for Americans. It's specifically the discourse surrounding the tactical necessity of American military veterans and it represents a profound distortion of both historical Marxist theory and contemporary material realities.
This argument typically manifests as a defense of U.S. service members against the "unprincipled" or "moralistic" anger of Global South populations, who are frequently chastised for alienating a demographic that American leftists claim will provide vital "military expertise" when "the revolution" inevitably arrives.
The argument usually goes something like this:
1. Veterans are working class.
2. Lenin argued communists must organize among soldiers.
3. Therefore hostility toward U.S veterans is politically immature, “moralistic,” or anti-materialist and "un-marxist" because soldiers can become revolutionary subjects and their military expertise will be necessary “when the revolution comes.”
To legitimize this position, chauvinistic elements within the Western left frequently weaponize Vladimir Lenin’s writings on the radicalization of Tsarist soldiers during the Russian Revolution. However, this theoretical transposition collapses under rigorous analysis, relying on a false equivalence that ignores the vastly different class structures, material incentives, and geopolitical positions of the 20th-century Russian conscript versus the 21st-century American volunteer soldier.
When Lenin wrote about the necessity of agitating among Tsarist soldiers, he was analyzing a peasant army composed of millions of intensely exploited, involuntarily conscripted laborers who were being meat-grinded in a catastrophic imperialist war. For the Tsarist soldier, "peace, land, and bread" were immediate, existential class demands that aligned perfectly with the Bolshevik platform. The Tsarist soldier was not a beneficiary of empire; he was its victim, forced at gunpoint to die for a monarchy that denied his family basic agrarian rights.
This distinction matters enormously.
Lenin’s argument was not:
“soldiers are inherently progressive.”
Nor was it:
“colonized people must suppress hostility toward occupying forces.”
Nor even:
“all criticism of soldiers alienates the masses.”
The Bolshevik position was that communist movements cannot afford to abandon armed sections of the population entirely to reactionary politics, especially during periods where state legitimacy is weakening.
In stark contrast, the contemporary U.S. military is a highly professionalized, all-volunteer force that functions as the enforcement arm of global capital. The American soldier is not a peasant conscript but a contractual employee of the imperial core. While the "poverty draft" is often cited to argue that enlistment is entirely coercive, this framing obscures the specific class character of the U.S. veteran. Enlistment in the U.S. military is fundamentally an investment in upward class mobility within the imperial system. It is a transaction where individuals trade a period of service to the empire in exchange for a highly coveted bundle of social democracy: guaranteed healthcare, fully funded higher education, housing subsidies, and preferential hiring in state apparatuses.
Consequently, the political consciousness of the American veteran class is not defined by revolutionary potential, but by a perpetual cycle of grievance rooted in unfulfilled imperial promises. The material reality of the veteran experience is a chronic struggle against the bureaucratic failures of the state; such as the inefficiencies of the Department of Veterans Affairs, rather than an awakening to the systemic evils of imperialism. Their radicalism, when it exists, is almost exclusively reactionary; it is an anger that the state has broken its contract with them, demanding the compensation they feel they rightfully earned by subjugating the Global South. This grievance-based politics does not threaten the capitalist state; it is entirely siphoned back into the existing political apparatus. The veteran class is ritualistically invoked every four years by both bourgeois political parties as a symbolic prop to legitimize American nationalism, promised reform, and then promptly discarded until the next election cycle. Their primary collective orientation is the preservation of their unique benefits, which are directly funded by the value extracted from the very Global South populations American leftists order them not to alienate.
Furthermore, the leftist claim that the domestic movement requires the "military expertise" of veterans for a looming revolution is a fantasy untethered from material conditions.
What revolution exactly?
Where is this revolution supposed to occur?
Under what conditions?
Emerging from what mass base?
Against what degree of state legitimacy?
Following what economic rupture?
With what organizational infrastructure?
With what relationship to organized labor, racialized surplus populations, migrants, or the global south?
Under what conceivable circumstances is a synchronized, armed proletarian uprising manifesting within the heavily militarized, heavily surveilled heart of the global hegemon?
The United States lacks both the vanguard organization and the broad-based class consciousness required to orchestrate a structural overthrow of capital. By centering the veteran as an indispensable tactical asset, American leftists reveal a deeply romanticized, militaristic understanding of revolutionary change that prioritizes combat aesthetics over actual mass organizing.
The ultimate irony of this position lies in its profound historical and ongoing betrayal of internationalism. The very "military expertise" that Western leftists fetishize is a euphemism for the operational knowledge acquired by executing counter-insurgency warfare, drone strikes, and resource theft across the Global South. The American veteran class is expertly trained not to launch revolutions, but to systematically crush them wherever they emerge in the periphery. To demand that victims of U.S. imperialism suppress their rage under the guise of "Marxist discipline" so that Western leftists can hoard imperial managers for a hypothetical domestic uprising is a textbook display of social-chauvinism. It subordinates the real, material suffering of the global proletariat to the theoretical convenience of leftists residing safely within the metropole.
The Sims 4 (8/?) • Abandoned Warehouse, Moonwood Mill.
in general i think it's kind of worse than useless to always fall back on this assumption that people are being "tricked" into being mras or twerfs or white supremacists or usamerican jingoists etc. etc. when you can ask the question "how do they stand to materially benefit from this hate movement" and 9/10 times find a very easy answer
one fight at a time
A South Dakota mining company has canceled a drilling project in the Black Hills after opposition from Native American tribes and local grou
glory to those who protect these sacred lands!
When transmascs attend an event or group "for trans people" and its mostly transmascs there, or even all just transmascs, I wish it was more common for them to notice this and asky why.
But its not. I've literally never seen one do it myself.
Me and my girlfriend attended a "Transgender Dance Party" in Fort Collins last month, and we were the only trans women there. Every single other person was transmasc or cis, and they all very obviously avoided us. Like, when we went out on the patio where a bunch of them were talking in order to try and socialize, everyone out there immediately went inside away from us. So we, the only trans women there, just left.
I just saw a post by someone pointing out that their college has a bunch of transmasc professors and not a single transfem professor. I have to assume that they have some kind of event at least once in a while where all the trans faculty get together. I have to wonder if even a single one of them ever notices that there arent any transfems there. I doubt it though.
and they say trans men are invisible when nobody cares about how trans women arent allowed in "trans spaces "
A lot of people become anarchists because they want to fight The Man but The Man is simply the father of their white suburbanite household. And then they will graduate from high school / undergrad and become just another whiteman plutocrat after being finished slumming it with their crustpunk band.