newacctidk [none/use name] @ newacctidk @hexbear.net

Posts

10

Comments

487

Joined

1 yr. ago

No but they think they would even want to. They really cannot accept that democrats are the empire to. As I like to say to this shit "oh so you just don't consider Iraqi's to be people? ok good to know"

Remember when a bunch of libs watched that and wrote a petition to rename one of the FBI buildings that's named after Hoover? Like yeah let's honor Hampton by naming a building used for training the people that killed him and will continue to churn out more like them, by sanitizing the name of the torture schools

This honestly makes me more convinced it is the Pillars of Heracles

The dollar was originally based on the Spanish American Peso, which contained a ribbon tied around each Pillar. The ribbon being an S for Spain makes sense.

It could also be the idea that the original abbreviation of ps just morphed, as the

I am so curious how the fuck your take away from me stating the age of both symbols was that I was saying it wasn't fascist. They asked when the dollar sign became a thing and I pointed to it being ancient, tied to the Pillars of Heracles.

No one is attempting to defend the symbol, you saw people talking about the mere reality of when something was first used and decided they were defending fasces? The fuck is the matter with you?

But since you did mention it; as a symbol from the Roman Republic it became associated with liberal revolutions and settler worker organizations, obviously the French used it, but so did the Gold Miners Union in Victoria leading up to the Eureka Strike. That strike is pretty on the nose as a white settler workers strike, one with incredibly disputed goals even among those who idolize it.

But it was also used by some very much non-fascist groups. The cover of the 1918 Soviet Constitution, pre-USSR even being a thing, has fasces

I hate pedantry and the "well it predates this thing so it is fine" shit, its why I have like 2 copypastas for three arrows shit. However I have to say, you can't exactly say it was always a fascist symbol. Fascism rose out of modern capitalism, unjust political systems of the past are not fascist just because they sucked and fascists 2,000 years later used their interpretation of them as a basis. Hell it predates the Roman Empire and even the Roman Republic it seems, originally being an Etruscan symbol, so if you want to be a pedant, yes it has meant something other than "imperial state power" because originally it meant the power of a sovereign or monarch. Or theoretically the coming together of 12 Etruscan cities to form what would become Rome according to early Roman historians. It turns out there are different kinds of oppressive or bad societies and governments. That golly gee maybe just maybe something was a symbol of monarchy, became coopted by ancient republican class dictatorships, then imperial power, then modern liberal republicanism, then fascism which emerged from that.

The whole thing with its components being used by the consuls is actually far more interesting than you made it out to be. It was used interchangeably as a way consuls were protected from rivals, including in the story of Brutus (the original consul) having them used against his sons who wanted to restore the monarchy, as well as symbols of authoritarianism and unchecked power. It was always a symbol of authority, but it is ludicrous to act like we are defending it by even casually acknowledging that it comes from around the same time as the curving line that was the basis for the dollar sign. How the fuck was THAT your take away from me indicating that, yes the dollar sign is in fact probably modeled AFTER or in connection to a fasces.

Or did you think I was showing that the dollar sign goes back that far......in order to say it doesn't connect to the Roman Republic weeb shit the founding fathers were on? I would love to know the thought process here because it seems like you wanted to get angry and so misinterpreted literally everything in a one line comment. All the while being anti-materialist for the sake of faux-outrage and obfuscation of fascism as just "authority and a ruling class", which yes is effectively what you are doing with this simplistic shit.

You want to truncate everything to from the Roman Republic, to the American Revolutionary War, to the Italian Fascists into this singular blob, instead of asking like OP was, WHY these symbols became used by both. What does it mean that liberal republicans pulled from the same ancient concept that fascism pulled from? Are they both idealizing the same path? How might their idealization differ? How did liberalism pull from the roman republic and its symbols, and then when liberalism failed, the thing it created (fascism) also pulled from those same symbols?

Almost like these different systems use Rome for different reasons, but in doing so showcase some of their failures. That the seeds for what would BECOME fascism, arise from WITHIN classical liberalism and its view of the past, as opposed to your conception of fascism as this fully formed thing handed down from rome to Mussolini. Which funnily enough regurgitates the exact BS the Fascists themselves thought about themselves. You effectively agreed with their framing of history all because you disingenuously read a one sentence comment. Or maybe the Soviet union was fascist since you have decided that things are absolute and symbols carry an innate quality unto themselves instead of being given qualities by those who use them. And in case you wanna misread that, I am not saying you should adopt these symbols, I am saying there are reasons why certain groups and movements adopt symbols from the past, and it is worth understanding why beyond just vibes. The Soviets wanted to evoke the idea of smaller parts coming together to become unbreakable as in the oppressed, the liberals wanted to appeal to the legitimacy of roman republicanism as they saw it, and the fascist saw it as ordaining them with some inherent power of past glory and the idea of harmony between all classes (the hallmark of Italian fascism) which forms the corporate state - the body made out of multiple parts. edit: also the Australians use of it is indicative of their adoption of traditional symbols of republicanism or enlightenment, that subconsciously reflects their limited approach to rights, one which excludes the rights of Aboriginal and Chinese workers.

If you look at why the US chose the fasces and why it chose an old Greek symbol and why those maybe together formed the dollar sign, you get a hell of a lot better understanding than if you just say "nah fascism was born in ancient Tuscany and was passed down to America and then to Italy as an intact thing". There is actually MORE to criticize america for if you take the other path, instead of simplifying.

We are materialists, stop using vibes and hyperbole.

I once again ask what I said in reply to their comment, what the fuck does Holodomor have to do with language suppression? This dipshit was so low effort and yet they thought they presented some bombshell.

Also I love how posting a law that bans displays of anti-fascism and the denigration of nazi collaboration is somehow impossible to construe as fascist.

I really hope this strengthens EFF popularity back home

God I wish I had more access to KHL games. This has got to feel amazing, for this team and city in particular.

Both seem to be very old symbols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_sign#Earlier_history_of_the_symbol

Let's put that aside though, what the fuck does the famine, even if it was man-made (it wasn't) have to do with language repression?

I think they are only wearing a helmet, not armor. Mayan sculptures often have helmets of some sort. Usually more ornate than this so maybe this is a depiction of an actual warrior helmet meant for practical use. https://www.livescience.com/archaeology/maya-warrior-statue-with-serpent-helmet-discovered-at-chichen-itza

That's a good rule of thumb

I'll be real, I think antiques need to be a century old, or at LEAST over 50 years old

That's my point. They kept in arcs from within season narratives, with seemingly little adjustment.

There almost certainly WAS something those episodes are written to build for, which they just didn't do cause of time, but without finding a satisfying reason for keeping that thread in at all.

I don't think that is why thing turned out how they did. I think Gilroy wanted to use as much of his original 5 season plans but truncated. That inevitably runs into a problem, and thus the whole season feels thematically disjointed. I really wish they had re-written more and just chosen a throughline for the season. They could even do the time jumps, just don't make each arc clearly feel like a piece of a different season with different ideas going on.

That's why changing our own language in order to avoid being called antisemites is a bad move. That's not to say do fucking tropes and shit, but people like me in the States cannot let them shape the narrative and the rules of engagement

I came across a documentary on the German spy ring the Red Orchestra with the synopsis being focused on how they are totally not communists

The Gestapo labeled them as communists and traitors for their efforts to put an end to Hitler’s reign -- a theory that was upheld by allied secret services until recently.

Historians now officially recognize the Red Orchestra as one of the largest and most efficient Nazi resistance groups, with members who held a variety of political and religious beliefs. Forty percent of the members were women.

First of all what the fuck do they mean "officially"? And who are said historians? Are all prior historians not official? But the more egregious thing is the implicit framing here of Communist and traitor being equal. Like this is treated as a proud rehabilitation like oh thank god this resistance was not communist so now we can feel bad they got murdered by Hitler, otherwise Hitler was in the right.

But also, the leadership was full of communists, had intense links to other communist parties, was particularly looked into by the Nazis because of their ties to the French Communist Party which the Nazis feared was being directly aided by the USSR

The Gestapo's purpose in running this particular funkspiel was to discover Soviet links to the French Communist Party, the French Resistance and the Red Three.

Yes the group was more informal, was cell based, and did have members of different political beliefs and religious backgrounds, but that was NEVER disputed by the older view. Here is a West German theologian who got a bunch of shit in germany for this statement

And no matter whether it suits us today or not, we shouldn't hide the fact that there was also such a thing as a 'Red Orchestra': communists who were also involved in this struggle and also fell as victims of Nazism. No matter what their ideological background was and what one might think of their particular motivations and actions: these people didn't want to be part of what the Nazis wanted; they wanted to set a limit to their depraved and ruinous regime, to put an end to it. [...] Had they succeeded, it might have rendered a large amount of further human as well as material sacrifices unnecessary. But they didn't succeed. And this was not just their own fault, but was also because so few in Germany were willing to join and help them with determination, before it became safe to do so, and that they received so little understanding or meaningful assistance from outside

A bunch of modern scholarship does "correct" the idea that they are a Soviet spy ring, something the Soviets and DDR never claimed. The reality is that the idea of a self conscious "Red Orchestra" organization that was centrally led was false, and them being a section of soviet intelligence is not true, but like......their network was almost entirely reliant on other communist parties in occupied countries, and cells did operations directly with the NKVD and red army. Like Hans Coppi who fucked up an exhibition mocking the soviets, and later met with NKVD who parachuted into Germany.

A BUNCH of leaders of those various cells were communists, and the infrastructure of the KPD was instrumental. Of the 400 members it is like a full quarter are Communists openly, more than any other group. Shit like this is why I dislike documentaries, they are narrative driven and sorta require a framing of "new evidence" or interpretation. They rarely add nuance

Heert repeating the orders at him again like he is a child causes such a good reaction shot from moustache man

Read the YA book "rebel rising" which is about Jyn. It peters off, but the first half 2/3 is focused on her and Saw and is fucking fantastic. Pretty much letting Saw proselytize about how a rebellion requires violence and that people will only fight once the empire has created a pile of bodies so high it dwarfs them, and someone needs to create that be it dead imps those fighting back cause, or civilians the empire slaughters, but either way the rebellion will stand atop corpses. The latter half is weak teen romance, though then it picks back up with Jyn depressed in prison and waiting for death. That shit gets dark for a star wars novel

Cassian was there with the empire. Remember it was a penal unit, he was jailed for attacking a trooper with a stick, spent time in prison, got sent as a penal battalion according to him though Luthen says he was a unit cook. He was 100% on the side of the Empire as prison labor. The Mimbanese had been Republic aligned and trained by clones, but fought against the Empire sometime later. The scenes are too dark to make anything out, but the costumes for them have them using retrofitted or broken clone armor.