The two best books on the subject are (still) Paul Avrich’s ‘Kronstadt 1921’, which I don’t think is online anywhere except google books- I’d upload it but I only have a hard copy.. and Israel Getzler’s Kronstadt 1917-21: The fate of a soviet democracy
You’re not far off in your assumptions by the way, but no the Kronstadt rebels weren’t anarchists; there were a few anarchists among them but the majority were Left SRs and SR Maximalists.
Wow, okay buddy, you’re BEGGING for a takedown here.
First world problems? Not a thing. People who say shit like “first world problems” are massive racist, imperialist, dismissive assholes.
If you’re ever tempted to say “first world problems,” do me a favor, and pull down a map. Tell me EXACTLY where the “third world” is. Make sure you correctly identify Switzerland as part of the third world, and Turkey as part of the First World. Don’t forget that Djibouti is a part of the first world.
Literally sit down and learn what “third world” means and why people from nonwestern nations think it’s a total bullshit term.
Second: you think people in the so-called third world don’t care about shit like makeup, and love, and technology? You think they don’t care about internet harassment? You think women over there don’t care about street harassment? You think they don’t care about fashion and clothes? You think they don’t care about music and video games?
Because THEY DO.
Right now, there is a woman in burundi teaching herself how to do a cut-crease eyeshadow look. Guaranteed.
"Third world" nations have fashion shows and fashion magazines. They care about street harassment. They care about the internet. They play video games. They know more about anime than your sorry ass every will. And the idea of "first world problems," which makes it sound like all women in "third world" nations are dealing with starvation, rape, war, acid attacks etc.
Women in Iran spend shitloads of money on makeup. Women in the DRC don’t just care about rape. Rape - the ONE THING westerners can be expected to know about women in Congo-Kinshasa - ranks NUMBER FOUR on the list of issues women in Congo want addressed. Political participation is number 1. Economic empowerment is number 2. Women in India are passionate about information technology, and you know what they hate? Coming to the United States, where Indian women in STEM are suddenly considered LESS GOOD than their male colleagues. My friends in Senegal taught ME how to download movies off the internet. Zimbabwe has a fashion week.
As Teju Cole points out:
"I don’t like this expression "First World problems." It is false and it is condescending. Yes, Nigerians struggle with floods or infant mortality. But these same Nigerians also deal with mundane and seemingly luxurious hassles. Connectivity issues on your BlackBerry, cost of car repair, how to sync your iPad, what brand of noodles to buy: Third World problems. All the silly stuff of life doesn’t disappear just because you’re black and live in a poorer country. People in the richer nations need a more robust sense of the lives being lived in the darker nations. Here’s a First World problem: the inability to see that others are as fully complex and as keen on technology and pleasure as you are.
One event that illustrated the gap between the Africa of conjecture and the real Africa was the BlackBerry outage of a few weeks ago. Who would have thought Research In Motion’s technical issues would cause so much annoyance and inconvenience in a place like Lagos? But of course it did, because people don’t wake up with “poor African” pasted on their foreheads. They live as citizens of the modern world. None of this is to deny the existence of social stratification and elite structures here. There are lifestyles of the rich and famous, sure. But the interesting thing about modern technology is how socially mobile it is—quite literally. Everyone in Lagos has a phone.”
95% of the people who use bullshit expressions like “First world problems” have NO IDEA what life is like for people in the so-called third world. You just like sitting there derailing.
And for the record? As a white, western feminist, DAMN RIGHT I concentrate on issues in the United States. Because when white western feminists try to “save” women outside the west? We do a SHIT job of it. We’re the ones who bowl over actual congolese women, and what THEY want, and say that the #1 issue affecting them is rape. We become arms of the imperialist patriarchal complex.
Classic example: the guy who was ruling Egypt for the British got british feminists to help him in his anti-headscarf campaign in Egypt. Why did he hate headscarves? Because he wanted to *break the spirit* of Egyptians. Not because he gave a shit about women’s rights.
How do I know that?
Because he was the head of the anti-women’s-suffrage group in England.
When women who live outside the west do awesome things, I will signal-boost them, and I will do whatever they think I can do to help. But I follow their lead. Because these are THEIR issues, and THEY know what matters to them. Not me.
FINALLY: My problems are not trivial. My problems are not bullshit. My problems are not to be dismissed with your racist, imperialist logic. Dress codes and makeup and music and books and video games MATTER. They matter to me. They matter to my life.
So fuck you.
And fuck your assumptions.
And maybe consider that YOUR first world problem?
Is that you can’t “see that others are as fully complex and as keen on technology and pleasure as you are.”
Not inspired by anything in particular, this post is a friendly reminder to the internet’s paleontology enthusiasts that TV docs are a great introduction to dinosaur science, but they shouldn’t be the last word in your quest for learnings.
To wit, a great many professional paleontologists are regular bloggers. What better way to keep up with new research and discoveries than directly from the people making them? Real science, no paywalls, plain english…what could be better? Here’s a sampling:
Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week - Mike Taylor and Matt Wedel
The Integrative Paleontologists - Andy Farke, Shaena Montanari, and Sarah Werning
The Contemplative Mammoth - Jacquelyn Gill
What’s in John’s Freezer? - John Hutchinson
Musings of a Clumsy Paleontologist - Liz Martin
Dinosaur Palaeo - Heinrich Mallison
Expedition Live! - Lindsay Zanno, Terry Gates, Paul Brinkman, and Lisa Herzog
The Evolving Paleontologist - Matthew Bonnan
Dinosaur Sabbatical - Phil Manning
Green Tea and Velociraptors - Sara Mynott and Jon Tennant
Archosaur Musings - David Hone
Asians in the Ivory Tower: Dilemmas of Racial Inequality in American Higher Education - Robert T. Teranishi
Current Issues in Asian and Pacific American Eduction - Russell Endo, clara C. Park, and John Nobuya Tsuchida
Unraveling the “Model Minority” Stereotype: Listening to Asian American Youth - Stacey J. Lee
The Deathly Embrace: Orientalism and Asian American Identity - Sheng-Mei Ma
The Hyphenated American - John C. Papajohn
Model-Minority Imperialism - Victor Bascara
Chains of Babylon: The Rise of Asia America - Daryl J. Maeda
In Defense of Asian American Studies - Sucheng Chan
Playing the Race Card - George J. Sefa Dei, Leene Luke Karumanchery, and Nisha Karumanchery-Luik
Asian American Dreams - Helen Zia
"So I thought you guys would like a summary of the facts"
At least half of your “facts” are lies but ok. Here we go…
"I first heard about the events not long after Dorian Johnson gave his interview, where he claimed that a decorated police officer with six years’ of experience decided one day, out of the blue, to murder a teenager in cold blood for no reason whatsoever."
Idk why you included “decorated police officer with six years of experience” in this sentence. By adding that piece of info into Dorian Johnson’s claim, you are implying that Johnson knew this information about the officer. Dorian Johnson didn’t even know Darren Wilson’s name but he’s supposed to know how long he’s been an officer? Ok. Also, please provide the source that says Dorian Johnson said Darren Wilson “decided one day, out of the blue, to murder a teenager in cold blood for no reason whatsoever”.
"First we found out that Michael Brown had performed a strong-armed robbery of a convenience store."
First of all, Mike Brown was described as a suspect. Secondly, “strong-armed robbery” but the clerk never called the cops? Ok. Thirdly, Darren Wilson did not know about the “robbery” when he stopped Mike and Dorian. (And don’t try to tell me that he found out sometime after stopping them but before killing Mike because all of that happened in no more than 3-4 minutes — see below.) Even if Darren Wilson knew about the “robbery” and believed the boys matched the description of the suspects, why did he only go after Mike? Dorian was with Mike the entire time. Why wasn’t he arrested after Mike was shot dead? Why did police refuse to interview Dorian, one of the witnesses to Mike’s murder and apparently a “robbery” suspect? Finally, whether or not Mike Brown was involved in a “robbery” DOES NOT justify his murder in any way, shape, or form.
"We also found out that Darren Wilson, the police officer that shot him, was treated for injuries after the fact."
What kind of injuries? A minor cut or scratch? A broken orbital bone? (Which was proven false btw) Again, you need to provide sources for these so called “facts” because (assuming this is Darren Wilson) he looks perfectly fine and uninjured in these pictures.
"1. After stopping them, Wilson did suspect Brown and Johnson of being the ones to have robbed the convenience store, as they matched the description and there was some plain-view evidence against them."
Shaun King broke down the entire incident, second by second. No more than 3 or 4 minutes had gone by from the time Darren Wilson stopped Mike and Dorian to the time Mike was shot dead. You’re trying to tell me that in the middle of all of this, Darren Wilson accurately heard a call he (may or may not have) received regarding suspects in a “robbery”? (No, he was not responding to a robbery call before stopping Mike and Dorian) And what plain-view evidence are you talking about exactly?
"2. One of the most common ways for a police officer to die in the line of duty is during a routine traffic stop when he doesn’t know that the people he’s stopped have committed a crime.”
What’s your point here? Should cops treat everyone that they stop/pull over as a potential criminal/killer?
"See, criminals, as a general rule, are very paranoid just after committing a crime. Whether or not the police officer knows is irrelevant because they don’t know if he or she does or not.”
Again, what’s your point? Are you trying to say that Mike Brown defending himself while being choked by Darren Wilson and then running away after Wilson pulled out his gun and fired a shot means that he was a “paranoid criminal”?
"To add to that, the injuries suffered by Wilson show that he was, in fact, attacked."
"Eyewitness testimony, as a general rule, is notoriously unreliable,”
6 eyewitnesses have the exact same story. None of them have changed their story once. With the exception of the 2 construction workers, none of the eyewitnesses knew each other at the time of the shooting. Only the police have changed their story, multiple times might I add.
"and people’s memories of events change over time as they hear new things about the events,"
"…such as a news report claiming that someone had their hands up in surrender just before being shot. You know, as an example."
Except Mike Brown was killed with his hands up in the air, surrendering. This is a fact. All eyewitnesses saw it.
"With the case of Dorian Johnson, however, his testimony was not a distortion of memory, but to the point where it’s highly unlikely that he didn’t know that what he was saying was a lie. For this evidence.”
What the fuck are you talking about? Dorian’s story matches all other eyewitness’ stories. There’s no way they all came up with the exact same lie without knowing each other before the shooting.
"Michael Brown was not shot in the back, as Johnson claimed."
When did Dorian Johnson ever say he was shot in the back? Again, source your info.
"The autopsy also showed no gunpowder residue on his body, but that doesn’t actually mean a whole lot"
This actually means more than you think. No gunpowder residue on his body means Mike Brown did not have control of Darren Wilson’s gun.
"(especially since he didn’t examine Brown’s clothing)"
Correction. Dr. Baden was not allowed to examine Brown’s clothing or any other physical evidence.
"keep in mind that both Wilson and Johnson claimed… and both also claimed"
How can Dorian Johnson and Darren Wilson make the same claims when Darren Wilson never wrote his own incident report (and the eventual incident report is essentially blank and there’s no use of force report) and Darren Wilson has never publicly come out to share his side of the story. So unless you are Darren Wilson, you know Darren Wilson, or you were in the room when he testified in front of the grand jury for 4 hours, you have absolutely no idea what Darren Wilson has claimed.
"(Edit: Something I forgot to mention when I originally posted this: The medical examiner claimed that there was “no sign of a struggle,” but this is a gross overinterpretation of the evidence that the medical examiner had available to him, that being Brown’s body. Had there been a question of whether or not Wilson attacked Brown in the way it’s said that Brown attacked Wilson, showing no sign of stuggle would be significant. The question, however, is whether or not Brown attacked Wilson, something that would not show up on Brown’s autopsy.)”
What? “Had there been a question of whether or not Wilson attacked Brown” You say that like it’s not at the very least a possibility. You also have ZERO proof that Mike Brown attacked Darren Wilson. Self defense =/= an attack.
"such as referring to Wilson as a ‘triggerman’”
Mike Brown was a “violent criminal” who participated in a “strong-armed robbery” but Darren Wilson wasn’t a “triggerman”? So you can demonize Mike Brown all you want but demonizing Darren Wilson is unfair? Ok.
(Ok is it just me or does the link not match this part of the sentence? Oh and Josie’s story is fake btw.)
"Someone recording the events after the shooting managed to accidentally capture a conversation wherein a witness is explaining to his friend that Brown charged Wilson. While eyewitness testimony is generally unreliable, because of how general the information is, as well as it being given without outside influence, this telling of the story can be taken as pretty reliable”
So you’re telling me that you are choosing to believe part of a conversation between 2 unidentified “witnesses” that you can kinda almost hear clearly if you turn the volume up all the way over 4 identified witnesses (plus 2 construction workers who asked to remain anonymous) who have all shared their story, the same story, with various news stations? HAHA ok. Moving right along…
"…far moreso than that of a known criminal and liar with plenty of motive to hide the facts and invent new ones."
Are you talking about Ferguson PD or STL Co. PD here? Please be more clear.
"Brown charging is why Wilson shot him so many times."
Mike Brown did not charge at Darren Wilson. Darren Wilson had already fired at least 4 shots as Mike was running away. Who the fuck would turn around after being shot (at) at least 4 times by a police officer and charge at them from around 100 ft. away? Come the fuck on.
"Was Brown unarmed? Yes. Did Wilson know this? Yes. But…"
"But the claim that he was unarmed and therefore posed no danger shows a blatant disregard for how dangerous unarmed individuals can be."
If Darren Wilson felt that his life was in danger as Mike Brown was defending himself against Darren, then he probably shouldn’t have approached Mike and Dorian with hostility. If Darren Wilson felt that his life was in danger as Mike was running away or when he raised his hands up in the air and said “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!”…. do I even need to explain this one?
"Boxing has, from the start, had a mountain of rules to help prevent deaths in the ring, but in spite of that, unarmed boxers still manage to kill their opponents without intending to do so. A 125 lb boxer can still threaten the life of someone else, even without intent to kill.”
This is beyond irrelevant to the murder of Mike Brown. Next.
"Double that (more, in fact) and add that intent, plus numerous environmental weapons (the asphalt, for example), and you have Michael Brown."
Intent? Mike Brown had NO intention of killing Darren Wilson. Shut the fuck up. You’re just making shit up at this point. Asphalt is a weapon now? If asphalt is a weapon doesn’t that mean that Darren Wilson could have used it as a weapon too?
So we have unarmed Mike Brown + asphalt + no intent = Threat to Darren Wilson
But armed Darren Wilson + asphalt + intent + actually murdering Mike Brown = No threat and innocent until proven guilty?
"You also have the possibility of him taking the gun from the officer and killing him with that, something which, by the accounts of the only witness that has not been proven to be a liar, he had already intended to do.”
2. Darren Wilson stops Mike Brown and Mike decides to try to take Wilson’s gun so he can kill him with it, fails and runs away, changes his mind and charges at Wilson in an attempt to assault/kill him? LMFAO please stop.
3. What witness are you talking about? And what witnesses have been proven to be liars?
"Michael Brown was not some innocent victim of a murderous police officer that was surrendering when he was shot."
"He was a violent criminal that forced a police officer to act in self-defense."
Every word of this sentence is a lie.
"While his death sucks,"
Wow could you show any less sympathy?
"…it came as a result of his actions and is far preferable to that police officer dying."
Excuse me?! Why is Mike Brown’s life automatically worth less than a racist cop’s life?
"And the response from the community has followed the same lines. There’s been rioting, looting, massive destruction of private property, and, more recently, extreme violence."
No rioting. Few looters. What massive destruction? The QT? I wouldn’t call that massive. Either way, the entire community was not responsible for that, nor did they support it. Wow but yeah look at all the extreme violence.
"And when the police respond to these actions with force, they’re vilified."
Tambourines, drums, posters, signs, etc. vs. Riot gear
"When they try to evacuate reporters for their own safety because of the violence in the area, the reporters accuse them of censorship."
"Not long afterwards, he was forced to deploy tear gas and other riot control measures against protestors throwing molotov cocktails at police officers, along with other acts of violence and rioting."
Forced? Really? Again, no rioting and only a few people have reacted violently.
"involved in the riots"
"He’s being villified by the very people with whom he sided (prior to actually knowing the facts, mind you)"
How do you side with a group of people without knowing the facts? How are you put in charge of a situation like this without knowing the facts?
"I have no doubt that some people in that group, probably even most, had nothing to do with the violence of those riots, but when you stand with those committing violent acts, it’s a little hard to distinguish you from those acting violently. And if you stand with them, you have nobody to blame but yourself when authorities respond to them in order to protect themselves and others."
Yeah it’s really hard to tell the “good cops” from the “bad cops”. “Good cops” should really start calling out “bad cops” on their racist and violent behavior instead of standing beside them and doing nothing to stop them. Otherwise they’ll have no one to blame but themselves if citizens react aggressively in order to protect themselves and others.
"People have been asking why the police didn’t reveal this information beforehand. There are two reasons: First, that’s not the way police operate.”
(Not entirely sure what info you’re talking about here but I’ll just throw this out there…) I can guarantee you that if Mike Brown had killed Darren Wilson it would NOT haven taken Ferguson PD 1 week to release Mike’s name. And if he was still free after 57 days? Shit…
"Secondly, they didn’t for the same reason why the US used to have a policy of not negotiating with terrorists”
Did you just fucking compare peaceful protesters to terrorists?!
"If you give people what they want in response to violence"
Protesters have been peaceful for 57 days! Only the police, a few agitators, and a few looters have been violent. Protesters have not.
"They’ve only released information in response to pressure from higher-ups"
You sure about that?
"and the fact that the rioting, looting, and violence only gets worse every time they release evidence only goes go show how much those “protestors” really want the facts"
Nothing but lies here.
"A black man was shot by a white police officer, and that’s terrible."
*Teenager. Not only is it terrible, it’s also nothing new. Mike Brown is not the first, and sadly not the last black person to be murdered by police. Mike Brown is also not the first or the last to have his character assassinated after his death. The murder of Mike Brown is not the first or the last officer-involved shooting that police have tried to cover up.
Mike Brown and his family deserve justice.
Arrest Darren Wilson.
Uhhhhhhhh I’m not the best when it comes to stuff about Josephine so I recommend going over to valinaraii for stuff about her.
BUT when it comes to Old Boney I can help you there. So I’m just gonna name a few that I like and think are good
- The Rise of Napoleon Bonaparte by Robert Asprey
- The Reign of Napoleon Bonaparte by Robert Asprey
- Napoleon: The Final Verdict by idk it has like 6 different authors
- The Campaigns of Napoleon by David Chandler
- Napoleon: The Path to Power by Dr. Philip Dwyer
- Napoleon by Octave Aubrey
Hello! Since I was mentioned, I will add some book recommendations about Josephine.
- If you read French, Bernard Chevallier’s works about her are a must. He wrote L’Impératrice Joséphine with Christophe Pincemaille, Douce et incomparable Joséphine alone and also was one of the editors of her correspondence. This year he is publishing yet another book on her.
- If you want Napoleon’s letters to her, there are English translations online, but you must know that most of these editions are censored and the “canonical”, uncensored one is in French.
- Knapton’s biography is pretty balanced, relatively brief and since copyright was not renewed on time, it’s on the public domain and online. Is good as a first approach, and the bibliography essay, even if somewhat outdated (so much has been published since then), is still useful regarding the sources and contains one of the best judgements I have read on the bibliography about her: It is almost a rule that the better the story about Josephine the more unreliable its source will be.The quantity of unsourced, unfounded stories that are around about her is certainly amusing.
- Also I find pretty good Andrea Stuart’s book, probably the “modern” biography of Josephine in English you must have, if you want only one. I differ with Stuart in some aspects (like quoting from books like LeNormand’s), but overall I find it an excellent read.
- Worthy of read: DeLorme’s biography and Josephine and the arts of the Empire, written by several authors but edited by DeLorme. Very useful about Josephine’s role as patron of the arts and natural sciences.
- For Napoleon AND Josephine I prefer Mossiker's book to Bruce's one.
For The Masses:
Reblog to save a life.
No you’re right, abstinence-only is totally the best method of sex education. It’s not like there’s study after study showing that abstinence-only is actually less effective. That would be absurd to continue teaching it this way if it was proven inefficient, right? Right? Right!?
I believe in free education, one that’s available to everyone; no matter their race, gender, age, wealth, etc… This masterpost was created for every knowledge hungry individual out there. I hope it will serve you well. Enjoy!
FREE ONLINE COURSES (here are listed websites that provide huge variety of courses)
- Khan Academy
- P2P U
- Academic Earth
- Stanford Online
- MIT Open Courseware
- Open Yale Courses
- BBC Learning
- Carnegie Mellon University OLI
- University of Reddit
IDEAS, INSPIRATION & NEWS (websites which deliver educational content meant to entertain you and stimulate your brain)
- Big Think
- BBC Future
- Seriously Amazing
- How Stuff Works
- Discovery News
- National Geographic
- Science News
- Popular Science
- YouTube Edu
DIY & HOW-TO’S (Don’t know how to do that? Want to learn how to do it yourself? Here are some great websites.)
FREE TEXTBOOKS & E-BOOKS
- OpenStax CNX
- Open Textbooks
- Textbook Revolution
- E-books Directory
- Books Should Be Free
- Classic Reader
- Read Print
- Project Gutenberg
- AudioBooks For Free
- Poem Hunter
- MIT Classics
- Many Books
- Open Textbooks BCcampus
- Open Textbook Library
SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES & JOURNALS
- Directory of Open Access Journals
- Wiley Open Access
- Springer Open
- Oxford Open
- Elsevier Open Access
- Open Access Library
- BBC Languages
- Learn A Language
- Foreign Services Institute
- My Languages
- Surface Languages
- OpenCulture’s Language links
2. COMPUTER SCIENCE & PROGRAMMING
- GA Dash
- Code Avengers
- The Code Player
- Code School
- Programming Motherf*?$%#
- Bucky’s room
- Learn Code the Hard Way
- Mozilla Developer Network
- Microsoft Virtual Academy
3. YOGA & MEDITATION
- Learning Yoga
- Learn Meditation
- Free Meditation
- Online Meditation
- Do Yoga With Me
- Yoga Learning Center
4. PHOTOGRAPHY & FILMMAKING
- Exposure Guide
- The Bastards Book of Photography
- Cambridge in Color
- Best Photo Lessons
- Photography Course
- Production Now
- Learn About Film
- Film School Online
5. DRAWING & PAINTING
6. INSTRUMENTS & MUSIC THEORY
- Music Theory
- Music Theory Videos
- Furmanczyk Academy of Music
- Dave Conservatoire
- Petrucci Music Library
- Justin Guitar
- Guitar Lessons
- Piano Lessons
- Zebra Keys
- Play Bass Now
7. OTHER UNCATEGORIZED SKILLS
- The Chess Website
- First Aid for Free
- First Aid Web
- Wolfram Demonstrations Project
Please feel free to add more learning focused websites.
*There are a lot more learning websites out there, but I picked the ones that are, as far as I’m aware, completely free and in my opinion the best/ more useful.
sometimes tumblr’s US-centric social justice makes me so fucking frustrated. Right now sweden’s third biggest party are literally neo-nazis and our elections couldn’t even get onto trending tags today, goddamit.
Okay, so the post is gaining notes and people are confused, so to explain what the hell is going on:
Swedish elections held were on last Sunday, 14th September. We’ve had a right-leaning government the past eight years and after this there will be a change of power. The new party, Socialdemocrats (S) gained a total of 31% percent. The old party, Moderaterna (M) gained 21%.
Sverigedemokraterna (SD) gained a total of 12.9%. Their policy is racist, Islamophobic, anti-immigration, anti-refugee, anti-diversity, anti-LGBT+, and anti-feminist. Basically, they tick every box on the douchebag lottery.
If you’re here to argue that they’re ~not actually~ Nazis: 1) Fuck you. 2) Fuck the horse the you rode in on. 3) I hope you get stepped on by a moose, you ignorant asswipe.
- they literally started as neo nazis. They have used a Neo-Nazi movement as campaign slogans,
- party members have assaulted immigrants with iron pipes (tw for racialised violence),
- worn Nazi symbols
- supported and helped build Neo-Nazi group SvP.
There’s probably more, but I don’t have links on hand.
They’ve been having rallies and demonstrations all over Sweden, and people have shown up just to turn their back on them and protest (this post explains it better).
In the 2010 elections, SD were pretty much considered no better than neo-Nazis and only got 5.7% votes - it put them in 6th place and was just enough to get them into parliament. In the elections before that, they got about 2.9%. In the past four years, they’ve grown exponentially in Sweden.
They’ve also run extremely extensive PR campaigns, appealing to the youth, kicking out members “exposed” of being racist, (note: these members often end up in SvP) and picking up buzzwords from the Socialdemocrats’ ideology.
29% of votes they gained this year were from swing voters who previously voted M, and the biggest gain have been in the south, in small towns and the countryside:
This is not something that’s just going on in Sweden. Europe has seen an influx of extreme-right parties over the last decade or so, often thinly disguised as a party that puts ‘traditional values’ and ‘national interest’ first.
In Greece and Hungary they’ve already been in power. In Germany, Netherlands, Italy, Greece, Finland France and UK, extreme-right-wing parties have been voted into the EU.
Because here’s the thing: we’ve forgotten what it looks like. We’ve gotten to the point where we’ve turned Nazism into a cartoonish lampoon of goose-stepping, uniforms and moral lessons that “we’ll never be like them~”, ignoring the fact nationalism is not as cut-and-dry two ends of an extreme but exists on a scale.
People have been apologising for SD’s actions for a while now because they’re not considered “extremist enough” to be neo-Nazis, because they don’t share the same beliefs, because they’ve “publicly denounced” SvP.
But the same people still get hurt. Still SD has the institutional and systematic power and privilege to oppress, degrade and humiliate people of colour, which they already have done. Stop making excuses for them. Stop making leeways for right-wing-extremists because that is how they gain tract.
Please spread this.
It was the same with the UK eu seats elections earlier in the year. We had UKIP, the uk independence party and as close to the tea party as we’ve ever seen in this country, get a majority of seats.
They once said that gay people cause bad weather, for a frame of reference, because i’m too tired to get all the relevant sources.