It
It

It

Nyes
Nyes

Nyes

A Href
A Href

A Href

Not
Not

Not

Height
Height

Height

point
point

point

tumblr blog
 tumblr blog

tumblr blog

hyrule
hyrule

hyrule

tmblr
tmblr

tmblr

tumblr
tumblr

tumblr

🔥 | Latest

Cute, Gif, and Omg: phantoms-lair: lynati: primus-why: karrashi: i-am-menial: So cute! Omg!!! Cosplay on point!!! !!!!!!!
Cute, Gif, and Omg: phantoms-lair:
lynati:

primus-why:

karrashi:

i-am-menial:
So cute!


Omg!!! Cosplay on point!!!

!!!!!!!

phantoms-lair: lynati: primus-why: karrashi: i-am-menial: So cute! Omg!!! Cosplay on point!!! !!!!!!!

Birthday, Children, and Crying: multismusa-deactivated20170218 What she says: I'm fine What she means: I understand the Chronicles of Narnia was at its heart a fairytale with theological analogies for children. But why did Lewis never address how they had to adapted to life on Earth again. Why does no one talk about how the Pevensies had to grow up with a kingdom of responsibilities on their shoul- ders, only to return to Earth and be children Take Lucy, she was youngest and perhaps she adapted more quickly-but she had the memories and mind of a grown woman in an adolescent body. Edmund literally found himself in Narnia, he went from a selfish boy to mature and experienced man. He found a purpose and identity through his experiences to come back as just Edmund, Peter's younger brother. Did people wonder why the sullen, sour boy came back, carrying himself like a wisened king? Did his mother wonder why he and Peter suddenly got along so well, why they spent so much time together now? And Susan, the girl of logistics and reason came back with a difference in her. She learned how to be a diplomat and ambassador, Susan the Gentle had to live to endure not-so-gentle circumstances. She had the respect she wanted, only to be just another teen girl. And Peter, he entered the manhood and maturity he so wanted. He earned the responsibility and stripes he yearned for. He learned to command armies and conduct the menial tasks demanded of a king to rule a nation But he came back, appearing to be just anther glory-hungry boy. Not to mention the PTSD they must have struggled with. Especially Ed mund. How often did he wake up in a sweat, screaming a sibling or comrades name? His parents believe it's the war, but it's an entirely different one he has nightmares about. How often did he have trouble with flashbacks and mood swings? And how many times did he and Peter sit over a newspaper or near the radio listening to reports on the troops. How often did they pour over lost battles and de- bate better strategies. Did their parents ever wonder why they seemed to understand flight war so well? How long was it before they stopped discussing these things in front of people? Why does no one talk about this??? cocoartistwrites Why am i fucking crying limblogs Why does no one talk about how the Pevensies had to grow up with a kingdom of responsibilities on their shoulders, only to return to Earth and be children It's not addressed because it's understood. It was the shared experience of the generation You are describing coming home from World War One, battle wearied and aged beyond belief, but walking around in the body of a youth. C S Lewis went to the front line of the Somme on his nineteenth birthday and went back to complete uni in 1918 after demob saxifraga-x-urbium Not seen it with this very very pertinent addition before 119,012 notes Remember, Listening to Her Is Important
Birthday, Children, and Crying: multismusa-deactivated20170218
 What she says: I'm fine
 What she means: I understand the Chronicles
 of Narnia was at its heart a fairytale with
 theological analogies for children. But why did
 Lewis never address how they had to adapted
 to life on Earth again. Why does no one talk
 about how the Pevensies had to grow up with
 a kingdom of responsibilities on their shoul-
 ders, only to return to Earth and be children
 Take Lucy, she was youngest and perhaps
 she adapted more quickly-but she had the
 memories and mind of a grown woman in
 an adolescent body. Edmund literally found
 himself in Narnia, he went from a selfish boy
 to mature and experienced man. He found a
 purpose and identity through his experiences
 to come back as just Edmund, Peter's younger
 brother. Did people wonder why the sullen,
 sour boy came back, carrying himself like a
 wisened king? Did his mother wonder why
 he and Peter suddenly got along so well, why
 they spent so much time together now? And
 Susan, the girl of logistics and reason came
 back with a difference in her. She learned how
 to be a diplomat and ambassador, Susan the
 Gentle had to live to endure not-so-gentle
 circumstances. She had the respect she
 wanted, only to be just another teen girl. And
 Peter, he entered the manhood and maturity
 he so wanted. He earned the responsibility
 and stripes he yearned for. He learned to
 command armies and conduct the menial
 tasks demanded of a king to rule a nation
 But he came back, appearing to be just anther
 glory-hungry boy. Not to mention the PTSD
 they must have struggled with. Especially Ed
 mund. How often did he wake up in a sweat,
 screaming a sibling or comrades name? His
 parents believe it's the war, but it's an entirely
 different one he has nightmares about. How
 often did he have trouble with flashbacks and
 mood swings? And how many times did he
 and Peter sit over a newspaper or near the
 radio listening to reports on the troops. How
 often did they pour over lost battles and de-
 bate better strategies. Did their parents ever
 wonder why they seemed to understand flight
 war so well? How long was it before they
 stopped discussing these things in front of
 people? Why does no one talk about this???
 cocoartistwrites
 Why am i fucking crying
 limblogs
 Why does no one talk about how the
 Pevensies had to grow up with a kingdom
 of responsibilities on their shoulders, only to
 return to Earth and be children
 It's not addressed because it's understood. It
 was the shared experience of the generation
 You are describing coming home from World
 War One, battle wearied and aged beyond
 belief, but walking around in the body of a
 youth. C S Lewis went to the front line of the
 Somme on his nineteenth birthday and went
 back to complete uni in 1918 after demob
 saxifraga-x-urbium
 Not seen it with this very very pertinent
 addition before
 119,012 notes
Remember, Listening to Her Is Important

Remember, Listening to Her Is Important

Bitch, Douchebag, and Fucking: i never realized how much i hate modern art until i took a class in modern art t's so pretentious, like half of the pieces we've looked at have been purportedly commenting on elitism in art and income disparities when the piece itself sold for thousands of dollars to be put in a museum for rich people to look at. you're supposed to look at barren canvases with vague splotches of color and meditate on the nature of life, navelgazing for an hour. bitch I can do that in my own home for free. most of the time the pieces themselves don't require any skill, it's just an asshole with some bright idea thatno one has ever thought of before(which is bullshit, originality is a myth) and the gall to pretend that they re saying something meaningful. A bunch of postmodernists specialize in literal plagiarism but with a different title. wow so edgy. really thought provoking. you sure are making a statement that's care the most egregious example is this bullshit this is an overhead view of a plaza wherein some famous guy was commissioned to design a public art piece for. The brick and nonfunctional fountain was already there. The sculpture? a literal wall of iron bisecting the courtyard. this guy was paid over 100k to design this. Now, this is located in a city, smack dab in the middle of a bunch of office buildings. Workers who had to spend 8 hours a day 5 days a week doing menial desk jobs had to look at this ugly piece of shit. You want to have a nice picnic during lunch break with your work buddies? tough shit. You get tilted arc instead fucko. You can't see from one end of the courtyard to another because some dick thought rebar sheet metal was more important. It also impeded movement between the buildings so that you have to go around this fucking obstacle instead of just fucking walking from one side to the other So yeah, these workers got pissed, because you're making an ugly place even uglier for obscene amounts of money without thinking about the ppl who actually have to look at it every day (who had no say in the design). There have been countless studies done on stress and related health problems in office workers and having to look at ugly as sin shit like this piece of work actually contributes to stress and decreases mental and physical health (as opposed to pretty scenery or When the designer was told what people thought of his masterplece, he threw an absolute shitfit. "art doesn't have to be pretty", he said. "art isn't for the public while it is absolutely true that art doesn't have to be aesthetically pleasing to be meaningful or relevant, putting this fucking monstrosity in a place where people are forced to look at it day in day out, in addition to the ugly buildings and streets and shit that comprises the rest of their lives is just kind of a dick move. Yes, people are painfully aware that life and art and all that shit isn't always pretty, they're the ones who have to live with that fact, not some pompous asshole who thinks he's god's gift to man because he put some metal wall in a And yeah, not all art is for the public. Art can be self- expression or just for your own enjoyment. But if you are being commissioned by the state, paid hundereds of thousands of tax dollars to make a PUBLIC art piece, yeah, it's for the public! saying that other people have no say in what that public art piece looks like, implying that if other people don't like your art that they just Don't Understand True Art TM, is this hugely egotistical self-masturbatory elitism that puts the artist above the working people (when like the whole point of art is supposed to be disrupting this kind of bullshit But that's not even the best part. This fucking douchebag. upon being told that people don't want this metal wall in their courtyard and that they want him to move it, freaks the FUCK out about how he "designed it just for this space and taking it out of its context would destroy it". Which like, yeah context is important when understanding the meaning of a piece. but iterally the only meaning of this piece was "i got paid obscene amounts of money and im gonna use it to make the ugliest thing i can think of literally just because. If you move it out of the context of the plaza it wouldn't be impeding foot traffic or being an eyesore to the workers who are forced to spend thein days there, which is destroying the purpose of the work. So in the end this guy opts to have the piece destroyed rather than moved because he can't stand to have hishigh art removed from its PurposeTM which is to be unpleasant. i dont give a single goddamn fuck about whatever the fuck, if it's causing people stress on top of their already stressful lives just because you thought it would be great to create this atrocity in a place where no one can escape from, you're not advancing anything. you're just So now the space has been converted to a rather plesant little oasis with plants and lots of benches. anyways thats my dissertation on how much i hate contemporary art and find it to lack relevance or meaning to the people it supposedly represents or defends. it takes itself too seriously and imposes arbitrary and hypocritical statements on the nature of art at the expense of any real substance. in the world we live in, pretty things for the sake of being pretty, having stories that are entertaining and engaging and relatable, having fun and feeling good in a world that devalues those things, etc. are far more impactful and radical than anything sitting in a museum created by some millionaire who jacks off to their 'fine art. thanks for coming to my ted talk have a good night #"that just means you're uncultured' i literally give no fucks susan #im not interested in elitism and you can suck a dick 53,922 notes The Elitism of Art
Bitch, Douchebag, and Fucking: i never realized how much i hate modern art until i took a
 class in modern art
 t's so pretentious, like half of the pieces we've looked at have
 been purportedly commenting on elitism in art and income
 disparities when the piece itself sold for thousands of dollars
 to be put in a museum for rich people to look at. you're
 supposed to look at barren canvases with vague splotches of
 color and meditate on the nature of life, navelgazing for an
 hour. bitch I can do that in my own home for free. most of the
 time the pieces themselves don't require any skill, it's just an
 asshole with some bright idea thatno one has ever
 thought of before(which is bullshit, originality is a myth)
 and the gall to pretend that they re saying something
 meaningful. A bunch of postmodernists specialize in literal
 plagiarism but with a different title. wow so edgy. really
 thought provoking. you sure are making a statement that's
 care
 the most egregious example is this bullshit
 this is an overhead view of a plaza wherein some famous guy
 was commissioned to design a public art piece for. The brick
 and nonfunctional fountain was already there. The sculpture?
 a literal wall of iron bisecting the courtyard. this guy was paid
 over 100k to design this.
 Now, this is located in a city, smack dab in the middle of a
 bunch of office buildings. Workers who had to spend 8 hours
 a day 5 days a week doing menial desk jobs had to look at
 this ugly piece of shit. You want to have a nice picnic during
 lunch break with your work buddies? tough shit. You get tilted
 arc instead fucko. You can't see from one end of the courtyard
 to another because some dick thought rebar sheet metal was
 more important. It also impeded movement between the
 buildings so that you have to go around this fucking obstacle
 instead of just fucking walking from one side to the other
 So yeah, these workers got pissed, because you're making
 an ugly place even uglier for obscene amounts of money
 without thinking about the ppl who actually have to look at it
 every day (who had no say in the design). There have been
 countless studies done on stress and related health problems
 in office workers and having to look at ugly as sin shit like this
 piece of work actually contributes to stress and decreases
 mental and physical health (as opposed to pretty scenery or
 When the designer was told what people thought of his
 masterplece, he threw an absolute shitfit. "art doesn't have to
 be pretty", he said. "art isn't for the public
 while it is absolutely true that art doesn't have to be
 aesthetically pleasing to be meaningful or relevant, putting
 this fucking monstrosity in a place where people are forced to
 look at it day in day out, in addition to the ugly buildings and
 streets and shit that comprises the rest of their lives is just
 kind of a dick move. Yes, people are painfully aware that life
 and art and all that shit isn't always pretty, they're the ones
 who have to live with that fact, not some pompous asshole
 who thinks he's god's gift to man because he put some metal
 wall in a
 And yeah, not all art is for the public. Art can be self-
 expression or just for your own enjoyment. But if you are
 being commissioned by the state, paid hundereds of
 thousands of tax dollars to make a PUBLIC art piece, yeah,
 it's for the public! saying that other people have no say in
 what that public art piece looks like, implying that if other
 people don't like your art that they just Don't Understand True
 Art TM, is this hugely egotistical self-masturbatory elitism that
 puts the artist above the working people (when like the whole
 point of art is supposed to be disrupting this kind of bullshit
 But that's not even the best part. This fucking douchebag.
 upon being told that people don't want this metal wall in their
 courtyard and that they want him to move it, freaks the FUCK
 out about how he "designed it just for this space and taking it
 out of its context would destroy it". Which like, yeah context is
 important when understanding the meaning of a piece. but
 iterally the only meaning of this piece was "i got paid obscene
 amounts of money and im gonna use it to make the ugliest
 thing i can think of literally just because. If you move it out of
 the context of the plaza it wouldn't be impeding foot traffic or
 being an eyesore to the workers who are forced to spend thein
 days there, which is destroying the purpose of the work. So in
 the end this guy opts to have the piece destroyed rather than
 moved because he can't stand to have hishigh art
 removed from its PurposeTM which is to be unpleasant. i dont
 give a single goddamn fuck about
 whatever the fuck, if it's causing people stress on top of their
 already stressful lives just because you thought it would be
 great to create this atrocity in a place where no one can
 escape from, you're not advancing anything. you're just
 So now the space has been converted to a rather plesant little
 oasis with plants and lots of benches.
 anyways thats my dissertation on how much i hate
 contemporary art and find it to lack relevance or meaning to
 the people it supposedly represents or defends. it takes itself
 too seriously and imposes arbitrary and hypocritical
 statements on the nature of art at the expense of any real
 substance. in the world we live in, pretty things for the sake of
 being pretty, having stories that are entertaining and engaging
 and relatable, having fun and feeling good in a world that
 devalues those things, etc. are far more impactful and radical
 than anything sitting in a museum created by some millionaire
 who jacks off to their 'fine art. thanks for coming to my ted
 talk have a good night
 #"that just means you're uncultured' i literally give no fucks susan
 #im not interested in elitism and you can suck a dick
 53,922 notes
The Elitism of Art

The Elitism of Art

Alive, Anaconda, and Community: ORDER HEREORDER HERE edens-blog: inner-fish: leftist-daily-reminders:leftist-daily-reminders:winterayars:leftist-daily-reminders:randomrants-obdm:Never gets an order wrong, takes breaks, gets lazy, comes in late, ‘forgets’ to wash hands after restroom, gets frustrated, or gets paidOf course ancaps just view human labor as a cost to be minimized and a tool for the accumulation of capital. Of course the implication here is “beg for scraps from the capitalists or starve”. Under more ideal conditions, where the means of production wasn’t hoarded by elites and managed in top-down fashion, machines replacing menial jobs would be precisely what we want – that means shorter hours and more leisure time. Under the current system, people need to find any job (no matter how necessary) and earn wages in order to subsist, so of course we’ve been conditioned to view machines replacing labor as a threat. But why should it be? If so many jobs aren’t necessary because they don’t, well, build and maintain the necessities of society (and only serve the interests of capital and bureaucracy), and so many other jobs aren’t necessary because they can be replaced by machines, WHY do we put up with this bullshit?? If everyone divvied up the necessary jobs in a democratic post-capitalist society, they could be eased by tech and the shifts could be reduced to fractions of what they are now. Capitalism will not be able to cope with the automation it sets into motion. Socialism is nigh.Capitalism will not be able to cope with automation. A lot of current theories about labor, capital, and the like will not be able to cope with a world where 1 person’s labor can provide a reasonable life for 100.Exactly. A central capitalist contradiction will make itself known in the next couple decades: if businesses are going to want to compete, they’ll need to automate, which in turn means laying off workers by the millions; the unemployed masses will not be able to buy the products that the capitalists sell, and at some time then a tipping point will be reached where the only jobs presented to people will be building and maintaining the machines (of course a bit of an exaggeration, but it’ll still likely be close to the reality). Universal basic income proposals will crop up, and the elite will see it as an opportunity to keep capitalism alive and kicking. (In other words, UBIs in this context are meant to maintain capitalism’s tiered ownership over the means of production, land, and resources, but with redistributive taxation to provide a livable floor for people, all to mitigate revolutionary upheaval in the end.) Of course socialists would rather just ditch this convoluted process of UBIs and taxation as a sophisticated feeding tube for capitalism – just turn the economy over to the people for democratic/for-need management and utilize all that automation for the collective good. That means people benefitting en masse, thus shorter shifts, thus more time for leisure and creative self-actualization and socializing. In that potential post-capitalist democracy, in the many scenarios where one person’s labor could provide a reasonable life for a hundred, you just need to divvy up those jobs so that any burden that exists can be eased, alongside a community of people having daily shifts of, say, 2 to 4 hours (and even that’s very likely a conservative estimate). Technology and democratic management of the collective capacities have the potential to liberate people from so much toil, if only we were to think outside of the myopic box of mainstream political discourse presented to us by OP. This isn’t about minimum wages – this is about demanding a world that works for human beings by default, not only when it’s convenient for the gears of capital. This isn’t about “the people need more jobs” – we ultimately need less jobs, with a focus on the necessary ones divvied up among populations and the economy from there focused on literally meeting societal needs, all so that people can spend most of their lives pursuing their interests and building connections. The creation of art, culture, inventions, and entertainment would arise from self-actualized individuals who create because they want to or because they see value in enriching the lives of others. We can do so, so much better than the bland status quo discourse that insists we must choose between smaller scraps and machines stealing our ability to access resources. The scraps were made by us, as was the whole feast, and they only find their way down to us because a superfluous owner class accrues the majority of the feast based on their unnecessary top-down ownership; the machines should be creating a world where it’s easier for us to access resources, not representing the opposite as a threat to us.I just want to remind everybody that OP is an ancap and that this is the disgusting view capitalism-apologists have of workers in the service industry. These machines are perfect for people who are mute, deaf, have anxiety, can’t read, or can’t speak English. This post is stupid and these machines are great.
Alive, Anaconda, and Community: ORDER
 HEREORDER
 HERE
edens-blog:

inner-fish:

leftist-daily-reminders:leftist-daily-reminders:winterayars:leftist-daily-reminders:randomrants-obdm:Never gets an order wrong, takes breaks, gets lazy, comes in late, ‘forgets’ to wash hands after restroom, gets frustrated, or gets paidOf course ancaps just view human labor as a cost to be minimized and a tool for the accumulation of capital. Of course the implication here is “beg for scraps from the capitalists or starve”. 
Under more ideal conditions, where the means of production wasn’t hoarded by elites and managed in top-down fashion, machines replacing menial jobs would be precisely what we want – that means shorter hours and more leisure time. Under the current system, people need to find any job (no matter how necessary) and earn wages in order to subsist, so of course we’ve been conditioned to view machines replacing labor as a threat. But why should it be? If so many jobs aren’t necessary because they don’t, well, build and maintain the necessities of society (and only serve the interests of capital and bureaucracy), and so many other jobs aren’t necessary because they can be replaced by machines, WHY do we put up with this bullshit?? If everyone divvied up the necessary jobs in a democratic post-capitalist society, they could be eased by tech and the shifts could be reduced to fractions of what they are now. 
Capitalism will not be able to cope with the automation it sets into motion. Socialism is nigh.Capitalism will not be able to cope with automation.
A lot of current theories about labor, capital, and the like will not be able to cope with a world where 1 person’s labor can provide a reasonable life for 100.Exactly. A central capitalist contradiction will make itself known in the next couple decades: if businesses are going to want to compete, they’ll need to automate, which in turn means laying off workers by the millions; the unemployed masses will not be able to buy the products that the capitalists sell, and at some time then a tipping point will be reached where the only jobs presented to people will be building and maintaining the machines (of course a bit of an exaggeration, but it’ll still likely be close to the reality). Universal basic income proposals will crop up, and the elite will see it as an opportunity to keep capitalism alive and kicking. (In other words, UBIs in this context are meant to maintain capitalism’s tiered ownership over the means of production, land, and resources, but with redistributive taxation to provide a livable floor for people, all to mitigate revolutionary upheaval in the end.) Of course socialists would rather just ditch this convoluted process of UBIs and taxation as a sophisticated feeding tube for capitalism – just turn the economy over to the people for democratic/for-need management and utilize all that automation for the collective good. That means people benefitting en masse, thus shorter shifts, thus more time for leisure and creative self-actualization and socializing. 
In that potential post-capitalist democracy, in the many scenarios where one person’s labor could provide a reasonable life for a hundred, you just need to divvy up those jobs so that any burden that exists can be eased, alongside a community of people having daily shifts of, say, 2 to 4 hours (and even that’s very likely a conservative estimate). Technology and democratic management of the collective capacities have the potential to liberate people from so much toil, if only we were to think outside of the myopic box of mainstream political discourse presented to us by OP. 
This isn’t about minimum wages – this is about demanding a world that works for human beings by default, not only when it’s convenient for the gears of capital. This isn’t about “the people need more jobs” – we ultimately need less jobs, with a focus on the necessary ones divvied up among populations and the economy from there focused on literally meeting societal needs, all so that people can spend most of their lives pursuing their interests and building connections. The creation of art, culture, inventions, and entertainment would arise from self-actualized individuals who create because they want to or because they see value in enriching the lives of others. 
We can do so, so much better than the bland status quo discourse that insists we must choose between smaller scraps and machines stealing our ability to access resources. The scraps were made by us, as was the whole feast, and they only find their way down to us because a superfluous owner class accrues the majority of the feast based on their unnecessary top-down ownership; the machines should be creating a world where it’s easier for us to access resources, not representing the opposite as a threat to us.I just want to remind everybody that OP is an ancap and that this is the disgusting view capitalism-apologists have of workers in the service industry.

These machines are perfect for people who are mute, deaf, have anxiety, can’t read, or can’t speak English. This post is stupid and these machines are great.

edens-blog: inner-fish: leftist-daily-reminders:leftist-daily-reminders:winterayars:leftist-daily-reminders:randomrants-obdm:Never gets an...