Laura. 29. SoCal Sherlockian. (x)(x)(x)(x)(x)

This blog consists of lots of the following:

+Sherlock Holmes (BBC + canon + other adaptations)

+Martin Freeman (like so so much)

+And some Benedict Cumberbatch too I guess

+Star Trek (TOS + reboot)

+Occasional Doctor Who, Game of Thrones, Hannibal, and Mad Men

+As well as Community, Parks & Rec, Brooklyn Nine-Nine, and Sailor Moon

+Plus audio gems like Cabin Pressure and Welcome to Night Vale

+As well as ~FEMINISM~ and other important issues

+And you know, other stuff. But yeah, lots of Sherlock. Lots and lots.

 

micdotcom:

Powerful photos capture the student protests in Mexico barely anyone is talking about 

While the world has focused its attention on the pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong, there’s another student movement gaining steam on the other side of the world.

The unfolding protests gripping Mexico began in the small town of Iguala, in the southwest region of Guerrero state, where the disappearance of 43 student teachers on the night of Sept. 26 has sparked outrage amid allegations of collaboration between local police and organized crime.

bakerstreetbabes:

natka-natka-natka:

mycroftisthequeenofengland:

Sherlock set details

mild-lunacy:

You know, there’s something that’s never made sense to me: why and how Sherlock has all this… stuff. Like, does he wander antique shops to look for silly obscure drawings? Does he randomly go to IKEA to buy lamps? And then go to more antique stores to buy more lamps? Does he seriously run errands to find just the right place to have carefully selected items properly framed or mounted professionally? Does he take time out of his day spent chasing murders, coming up with insane experiments and lolling about on his sofa in his Mind Palace to… put up curtains properly? With a double curtain rod?

Like, as a highly cerebral and lazy person who nevertheless likes unique and attractive surroundings, I’m here to tell you that this stuff takes both work and attention to keep up.  Like, not just cleaning (which, let’s say Mrs. Hudson takes care of, though this is just at Baker Street, and all this stuff existed before he’d moved in, there on the first day). No, there’s fixing stuff, looking for and finding things that match stuff, organizing stuff and throwing out useless stuff, and so on. And some things aren’t even fun to shop for— like curtains, mirrors and rugs, for example. Or even sofas. Can you imagine Sherlock Holmes in a sofa emporium? No?

The thing is, I dunno what I’m supposed to take away from this. Because the traditional Baker Street rooms weren’t really decorated by Holmes in their entirety, and Mrs. Hudson really was their housekeeper. Even then, Holmes was a lot more of a socially adjusted individual than our Sherlock, more in line with conventional behavior (in his own way). Like, this sort of collection of bits and bobs takes years to amass, so it’s not something Sherlock could’ve built up only in the years he was sober. So, I mean, as much as he was Shezza in his twenties, he had to have been that guy who takes time out of his Sunday to shop for curtains and ducks into cute antique shops not just to interrogate the owners, but to snag a weird figurine, or a pair of binoculars, or… a pretty drawing. A pretty drawing he needed to go to a frame shop and find a suitable frame for, maybe a mat. He had to go to and pay people to cut mats for some of those pics; he had to hunt around for some of those frames, too, because they’re unusual sizes. And maybe he needed a new sofa, and he’d heard there was a sale across town.

To be honest, it looks like a professor’s flat, or the flat of a quirky and whimsical but successful adult professional. Certainly an intellectual, a naturalist perhaps, but definitely an adult. It’s… mature.

The tastes are mature, varied, sophisticated, with a sense of humor but also the stuffiness that comes with age, when people have ‘grown up’ and feel they need things like proper curtains and framed pictures instead of just posters stuck to the wall.  Here, everything is framed. Let me put it this way: I’ve only started overwhelmingly framing things this year. I’m Sherlock’s age. Is he… more mature than I am?? haha

Contrast this to the way John’s bedsit looks:

It matches what we know of him precisely. He hasn’t added anything. The only thing he does is keep his bed neatly folded. Even if the room didn’t come furnished (which I’m sure it did), I can see John buying these things in one day, and saying ‘good enough’. But when I try to imagine Sherlock Holmes spending a Sunday afternoon carefully putting up those steel picture hangers (I know all about those), my mind draws a blank. However, it’s canon. I’m just saying it says something about Sherlock in a way even his impeccable suits do not. The suits are for show, to make an impression— his flat isn’t. It’s not the modern, streamlined and impeccable thing his suits would suggest: it’s quirky, cozy, eclectic, warm. Why does Sherlock have this flat?

songstersmiscellany:

That is a puzzle!  It’s tempting to think that Mycroft ex machina (via his minions?) is responsible for the larger furnishings, as well as the hanging of the pictures and other items, but then would Sherlock want that interference?

I also wonder about the lack of CDs or vinyl, or a high end stereo system beyond the headphones on the skull (unless there is and I’ve missed them, which is certainly possible since I haven’t done a frame by frame search of 221B scenes looking for these items).  I mean Sherlock is an accomplished violinist, trained well enough to play J.S. Bach and compose, so he has almost certainly a Western classical background.  Even though he loves his tech, many classical musicians avoid mp3s (compression) and computer audio systems when doing serious listening.  Why are there no CDs or records from Sherlock’s childhood and young adulthood?  Are they at home?  In storage?  Were they given away?  Does Sherlock only keep recordings on his computer?  Or is his musical memory so good that he has placed a library of his favorite recordings in his memory palace?  Certainly some very talented musicians like Mozart could remember a piece after hearing it once.  Does Sherlock have that capability? 

One clue is the Memory Palace sequence in THoB, in which we briefly hear a bit of Elvis’s cover of “You Ain’t Nothing But a Hound Dog”.  That does suggest Sherlock might have a library of music in the MP, not all of it Western classical/art music.  But what isn’t clear is how extensive an MP!music library is.  Is it an ad hoc collection of music he’s learned as a violinist plus music he’s needed for cases, something similar to the eclectic collection of items he keeps in his flat?  Or does he include any piece he’s ever enjoyed?  Or does all music get swept in, whether he likes it or not (poor Sherlock, the earworms could be quite annoying)? 

Also: did he enlarge his music collection during the Hiatus, taking in at least some of the music he encountered abroad?  It’s no surprise I like this last idea, since I collaborated with emmadelosnardos and a few other fans to create a series of fanmixes of music Sherlock might have heard in AfroGeekGoddess’s version of Sherlock’s hiatus travels.  

I’m going to think about this more and do some rewatching, but I welcome additions and thoughts.

thevanishingtwin:

Oh these are wonderful questions to ask!

To be honest I don’t see Sherlock carefully selecting pieces, whether in IKEA or in antique shops.

I think Mrs Hudson is responsible for the wallpaper, curtains and rugs, either because she put it up herself in a distant past or because they were left by a previous tennant. The same might be the case for the general furnishing (sofa, table and chairs, cupboards). I say that for two reasons: first because the wallpaper in the rest of the house is lighter but in an equally bold style that I can relate to Mrs Hudson, and second because I assumed from ASiP that Sherlock had just moved in and the curtains and rugs blend in with the flat in a way that to me says old and dusty and never moved in a decade. 

The furnishing looks sort of spontaneously acquired, if that makes sense; like Sherlock (in his previous lodging) suddenly thought “I need a lamp” and then just did whatever necessary to get a lamp there, whether that’s ordering online from IKEA and having it delived the next day, or visiting the second-hand shop on the street corner. Same with the mirror, the cupboards, possibly the fan.

As for all the knick-knacks, I have the headcanon that he acquired them by either of two different means: Either because they were necessary for a case, and after he just didn’t get rid of it. Or, and I like this one, he has the habit of pilfering things he likes from crime scenes in a sort of running bet with himself that none of the other police officers would notice anything gone. Paintings and statuettes and headphones and one day he even managed to abscond with an entire mounted sword (or epee or whatever it is) without anyone noticing. He had to stop it when Lestrade finally catched on, but stealing the ashtray from Buckingham Palace for John was a last personal victory. I might need to fic this.

Anyway, the music. There is an expensive 6 CD sound system in his bedroom if I’m not mistaken, so I’d wager there is a CD collection somewhere, but we haven’t seen it yet (or the sound system is obtained the same way as above; he needed a CD player and bought the first he saw, never mind that it’s a couple thousand pounds).

I like the idea of an entire mind palace music collection though, and I think the Hound Dog snippet might point to that. Maybe it’s not in a separate mind palace room, but woven in with everything, since he seems to make mental connections through associations. It wouldn’t surprise me if he indeed is able to immediately mentally record and store any music he hears, and a storage system based on associations might be a big factor in doing so.

Besides, he could also be the kind of musician to scoff at any interpretation that isn’t his own (in the case of classical music) and therefore does not have any CDs, but prefers to form his own interpretation by studying the score himself, and keeps that internal sound in his mind palace.

recentlyfolded reblogged this from songstersmiscellany and added:

After getting a look at the family home, which has the slightly cluttered but very personal, lived-in look of a country home, I can envision a somewhat different scenario. I can see Mummy, happy that Sherlock is going to have a nice central London flat with a friend, loading up the car (or maybe demanding a pick-up from Mycroft and ending up with his minions) and bustling off to town to help him get “settled in” after combing his old room as well as the attics for things that she knows he’ll like or want. Which of course means that she goes around and directs the setting up of the furniture and hanging of pictures, and Sherlock dumps his files and working stuff anyplace they might have space to land. Can’t you hear the back-and-forth as that’s going on? And by the end of the day, it’s in the shape John first sees in SiP.

Awesome meta is awesome.

Basil and Dawson perform the Mousgrave Ritual while mountain climbing in the Swiss Alps.
From Basil and the Lost Colony by Eve Titus. Illustrations by Paul Galdone. 

Basil and Dawson perform the Mousgrave Ritual while mountain climbing in the Swiss Alps.

From Basil and the Lost Colony by Eve Titus. Illustrations by Paul Galdone. 

consulting-homos:

2ND POTATOJOHN GIVEAWAY!!

I want to spread some more potato love around so I made another doll for a giveaway :3

The doll’s about 14 cm (~5.5 inches) and made with acrylic yarn, felt, glue and thread with polyester stuffing.

Dem rules:

x The giveaway end on the 31st of October, 23:59 pm

x I will choose one winner randomly

x You don’t need to follow me but it would be cool u kno

x Only reblogs count. You can reblog as much as you want but please don’t spam your blog.

x Please have your askbox open in case you win so I can send you a message. If you don’t reply in 48 hours I’ll choose another winner.

Potato!John belongs to Franzi!!

ps. If you don’t wanna take part in the giveaway but wanna signal boost just tag “signal boost” or whatever so I know :3

paperdollcircus:

frickhead:

ATTENTION EVERYONE IN THE LA AREA!!
My cousin, TALLON, was reported MISSING today. He is an AUTISTIC BLACK TEEN AND IS COMPLETEY NON-VERBAL. HE DOES NOT RESPOND TO HIS NAME. This young man went out for his daily bike ride, unattended, and did not come back. Tonight, HE IS IN LA BY HIMSELF. He is 6’0, 200lbs, and was last seen wearing a white t shirt and khaki shorts. PLEASE SIGNAL BOOST!!

SIGNAL BOOST. this was just on the news. seriously, be on the look out. help this kid get home safe and sound.

paperdollcircus:

frickhead:

ATTENTION EVERYONE IN THE LA AREA!!

My cousin, TALLON, was reported MISSING today. He is an AUTISTIC BLACK TEEN AND IS COMPLETEY NON-VERBAL. HE DOES NOT RESPOND TO HIS NAME. This young man went out for his daily bike ride, unattended, and did not come back. Tonight, HE IS IN LA BY HIMSELF. He is 6’0, 200lbs, and was last seen wearing a white t shirt and khaki shorts. PLEASE SIGNAL BOOST!!

SIGNAL BOOST. this was just on the news. seriously, be on the look out. help this kid get home safe and sound.

thepeoplesrecord:

The Malala you won’t hear aboutOctober 16, 2014
Malala Yousafzai, the 17-year-old Pakistani activist, has won a well-deserved Nobel Peace Prize, putting her and her amazing, tragic story back in the spotlight. Per usual, nevertheless, the corporate media has taken this positive development and exploited it in the service of U.S. imperialism.
The corporate media loves talking about Malala’s remarkable bravery and strength in standing up for girls’ rights to education, and the brutality of the Taliban forces that tried to assassinate her on her school bus. Such coverage fuels its orientalist, neocolonialist narrative about “backward,” misogynist Muslims and their need for “white saviors,” thereby legitimizing Western imperialist interests in South and West Asia.
Malala’s Nobel victory can be appropriated by the U.S. political establishment to “prove” that its invasion, occupation and destruction of Afghanistan has “helped” its people. (As for the hundreds of thousands killed and injured in the process, well, those inconvenient exceptions aren’t part of this narrative.)
As Michael Parenti points out, while most people who win the Nobel “Peace” Prize do so for war-mongering and crimes against humanity (Henry Kissinger boasts one, for example, along with Barack Obomba himself), Malala actually deserves hers. This makes the exploitation even more grotesque.
Malala has devoted her life to fighting for education for children—a most noble and important cause. When she implored at the United Nations, “Let us pick up our books and our pens, they are the most powerful weapons. One child, one teacher, one book and one pen, can change the world. Education is the only solution,” the Western intelligentsia ate it up like a voracious canine gobbling up its kibbles (on second thought, perhaps a vulture would have been a more apt choice for this simile).
Everyone can agree that education for children is a positive goal. By emphasizing that education is the only solution, the West can draw attention away from the very realmaterial concerns facing the vast majority of the world.
This oversight is by no means the fault of Malala. In that same speech, just before the above excerpt, she spoke of “a glorious struggle against illiteracy, poverty and terrorism.” Two of these three things are endlessly emphasized throughout the corporate press. You can guess which one is excluded.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -The Malala Who Opposes Global Poverty
Roughly half of the world still lives on less than $2.50 per day. Around one-quarter of people live in extreme poverty, less than $1.25 a day. UNICEF estimates that 24,000 children under the age of five die each and every day because of poverty, meaning that “every 3.6 seconds one person dies of starvation. Usually, it is a child under the age of 5.” And, in many countries, poverty is getting worse.
Education certainly has a role in the fight against poverty, and it’s important that one learns, say, basic chemistry. (Malala was sitting in chemistry class when she was informed she had won the Nobel Prize.) But learning basic chemistry does not provide billions of impoverished people with food, clean water, and health care. That takes material, collective action.
Malala understands how poverty creates and perpetuates the very social and political ills against which she is fighting. She continuously stresses the importance of not just spreading education, but of directly combating poverty. Yet these calls fall on the selectively deaf ears of the Western media.
The press picks and chooses which of Malala’s messages are amplified—and which are silenced. It can hardly get enough of her insistence on the importance of “the philosophy of nonviolence I have learned from Gandhi, Bacha Khan and Mother Teresa.” The Western intelligentsia positively salivates upon hearing such messages, despite the fact (or because of it?) that Gandhi was a virulent racist and Mother Teresa had ties to Central and South American dictators.
Interestingly, many of the same people lauding the Nobel Peace Prize laureate for her advocacy of nonviolence also happily cheered on the violence of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. The utter hypocrisy does not strike them. After all, it has always been much more useful to advocate a philosophy of nonviolence for individuals and oppressed groups than hegemons and states.
As much as it highlights Malala’s words on education and nonviolence, the U.S. corporate media never mentions the side of Malala that it doesn’t like, the side of Malala that doesn’t serve but rather challenges Western imperialist interests, the side of Malala that overtly opposes not just U.S. drone strikes but capitalism itself.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -The Malala Who Opposes Drones
On October 11, 2013, Malala met with Barack Obama in the Oval Office. The press could hardly have lauded the president more for taking the time out of his busy schedule to meet the 16-year-old activist, and for bringing his family with him.
What went much less reported was that at this meeting, Malala warned that U.S. “drone attacks are fueling terrorism. Innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people.”
The White House, which, given its supposed investment in fighting terrorism, would presumably not be interested in spreading it further, left these comments out of its official statement.
Just a few weeks after this meeting, another Pakistani girl visited Washington to testify before Congress, and received much less media attention. Nabila Rehman was 8 years old when she was out in a field picking okra and her grandmother was eviscerated before her eyes by a U.S. drone strike. Seven children were also wounded, including family members.
Nabila’s brother Zubair, a 13-year-old who was injured in the US drone attack, told the five congress-people decent enough to show up, “I no longer love blue skies. In fact, I now prefer grey skies. Drones don’t fly when sky is grey.” The Rehman family’s story was so dreadful that the translator burst into tears while telling it to Congress.
Given such a horrific report, you’d think the U.S. government would express interest in learning from it to make sure random civilians are not again slaughtered by bombs falling from microscopic dots in the sky. Yet only five (out of 435) House members attended the hearing.
Al Jazeera writer Murtaza Hussein noted that, in a symbol of the “utter contempt in which the government holds the people it claims to be liberating, while the Rehmans recounted their plight, Barack Obama was spending the same time meeting with the CEO of weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.”
Clearly, stoking the military-industrial complex that creates the Predator drones that havemurdered and injured thousands of innocent civilians is a higher priority for the president of the United States than meeting the actual victims of what can only correctly be referred to as state terrorism.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -The Malala Who Opposes Capitalism
Last year, I wrote a brief article titled Malala Yousafzai, Spivak, Abu-Lughod and the White Savior Complex. I noted that Gayatri Spivak, in her classic article "Can The Subaltern Speak?" explained that colonialist powers justify their draconian, parasitic rule with the belief that they are “white men are saving brown women from brown men.”
In her well-known essay, "Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?" Lila Abu-Lughod situated Spivak’s thesis in a contemporary setting, explaining how the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was justified with the exact same argument—the Bush administration was a group of overwhelmingly white leaders who consistently workedagainst women’s rights in their own country but now acted desperate to “save” Afghan women from Afghan men.
In his article Malala Yousafzai and the White Saviour Complex, journalist Assed Baig explored how this racist “white man’s burden” phenomenon is still alive and well, detailing the repugnant ways in which the West has exploited Malala Yousafzai’s amazing strength and bravery to support its interests.
Absent from many of these discussions, however, is that Malala herself is well aware of this manipulation. In a statement released on October 13, 2013, she defiantly declared that she is "not a Western puppet."
When discussing the way in which the neocolonialist West exploits and manipulates those working against oppression, one should be careful to establish that this is not done to them unwittingly. We are dealing with agents, individuals who understand the implications of their actions and change them accordingly. To forget this fact is, in a less overt way, to uphold the very paternalist, neocolonialist strictures we seek to destroy.
As Spivak reminds us, the subaltern indeed speaks—and not only speaks but resists oppressors. Articulated a bit differently, Arundhati Roy insisted, “There’s really no such thing as ‘the voiceless.’ There are only the deliberately silenced or the preferably unheard.”
The attempt to deliberately silence Malala is not only evident in the way the U.S. corporate media ignores her criticism of U.S. drones; even more insidious is its complete disregard for the Nobel Peace Prize laureate’s politics. In March 2013, Malala sent this message to the congress of Pakistani Marxists:

First of all, I’d like to thank The Struggle and the IMT [International Marxist Tendency] for giving me a chance to speak last year at their Summer Marxist School in Swat and also for introducing me to Marxism and Socialism. I just want to say that in terms of education, as well as other problems in Pakistan, it is high time that we did something to tackle them ourselves. It’s important to take the initiative. We cannot wait around for any one else to come and do it. Why are we waiting for someone else to come and fix things? Why aren’t we doing it ourselves?
I would like to send my heartfelt greetings to the congress. I am convinced Socialism is the only answer and I urge all comrades to take this struggle to a victorious conclusion. Only this will free us from the chains of bigotry and exploitation.

This is the Malala the Western corporate media doesn’t like to quote. This is the Malala whose politics do not fit neatly into the neocolonialist, cookie-cutter frame of presentation. This is the Malala who recognizes that true liberation will take more than just education, that it will take the establishment of not just bourgeois political “democracy,” but ofeconomic democracy, of socialism.
When the courageous activist speaks of the importance of education and nonviolence, the West shouts her words loudly from the media mountaintops. When that same activist criticizes predator drones and, that most sacrosanct entity of all, capitalism, the silence is deafening.
Only the distinctive buzzing of U.S. killer drones can be heard, watching and bombing overhead, protecting empire and “freedom.”
Source

thepeoplesrecord:

The Malala you won’t hear about
October 16, 2014

Malala Yousafzai, the 17-year-old Pakistani activist, has won a well-deserved Nobel Peace Prize, putting her and her amazing, tragic story back in the spotlight. Per usual, nevertheless, the corporate media has taken this positive development and exploited it in the service of U.S. imperialism.

The corporate media loves talking about Malala’s remarkable bravery and strength in standing up for girls’ rights to education, and the brutality of the Taliban forces that tried to assassinate her on her school bus. Such coverage fuels its orientalist, neocolonialist narrative about “backward,” misogynist Muslims and their need for “white saviors,” thereby legitimizing Western imperialist interests in South and West Asia.

Malala’s Nobel victory can be appropriated by the U.S. political establishment to “prove” that its invasion, occupation and destruction of Afghanistan has “helped” its people. (As for the hundreds of thousands killed and injured in the process, well, those inconvenient exceptions aren’t part of this narrative.)

As Michael Parenti points out, while most people who win the Nobel “Peace” Prize do so for war-mongering and crimes against humanity (Henry Kissinger boasts one, for example, along with Barack Obomba himself), Malala actually deserves hers. This makes the exploitation even more grotesque.

Malala has devoted her life to fighting for education for children—a most noble and important cause. When she implored at the United Nations, “Let us pick up our books and our pens, they are the most powerful weapons. One child, one teacher, one book and one pen, can change the world. Education is the only solution,” the Western intelligentsia ate it up like a voracious canine gobbling up its kibbles (on second thought, perhaps a vulture would have been a more apt choice for this simile).

Everyone can agree that education for children is a positive goal. By emphasizing that education is the only solution, the West can draw attention away from the very realmaterial concerns facing the vast majority of the world.

This oversight is by no means the fault of Malala. In that same speech, just before the above excerpt, she spoke of “a glorious struggle against illiteracy, poverty and terrorism.” Two of these three things are endlessly emphasized throughout the corporate press. You can guess which one is excluded.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Malala Who Opposes Global Poverty

Roughly half of the world still lives on less than $2.50 per day. Around one-quarter of people live in extreme poverty, less than $1.25 a day. UNICEF estimates that 24,000 children under the age of five die each and every day because of poverty, meaning that “every 3.6 seconds one person dies of starvation. Usually, it is a child under the age of 5.” And, in many countries, poverty is getting worse.

Education certainly has a role in the fight against poverty, and it’s important that one learns, say, basic chemistry. (Malala was sitting in chemistry class when she was informed she had won the Nobel Prize.) But learning basic chemistry does not provide billions of impoverished people with food, clean water, and health care. That takes material, collective action.

Malala understands how poverty creates and perpetuates the very social and political ills against which she is fighting. She continuously stresses the importance of not just spreading education, but of directly combating poverty. Yet these calls fall on the selectively deaf ears of the Western media.

The press picks and chooses which of Malala’s messages are amplified—and which are silenced. It can hardly get enough of her insistence on the importance of “the philosophy of nonviolence I have learned from Gandhi, Bacha Khan and Mother Teresa.” The Western intelligentsia positively salivates upon hearing such messages, despite the fact (or because of it?) that Gandhi was a virulent racist and Mother Teresa had ties to Central and South American dictators.

Interestingly, many of the same people lauding the Nobel Peace Prize laureate for her advocacy of nonviolence also happily cheered on the violence of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. The utter hypocrisy does not strike them. After all, it has always been much more useful to advocate a philosophy of nonviolence for individuals and oppressed groups than hegemons and states.

As much as it highlights Malala’s words on education and nonviolence, the U.S. corporate media never mentions the side of Malala that it doesn’t like, the side of Malala that doesn’t serve but rather challenges Western imperialist interests, the side of Malala that overtly opposes not just U.S. drone strikes but capitalism itself.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Malala Who Opposes Drones

On October 11, 2013, Malala met with Barack Obama in the Oval Office. The press could hardly have lauded the president more for taking the time out of his busy schedule to meet the 16-year-old activist, and for bringing his family with him.

What went much less reported was that at this meeting, Malala warned that U.S. “drone attacks are fueling terrorism. Innocent victims are killed in these acts, and they lead to resentment among the Pakistani people.”

The White House, which, given its supposed investment in fighting terrorism, would presumably not be interested in spreading it further, left these comments out of its official statement.

Just a few weeks after this meeting, another Pakistani girl visited Washington to testify before Congress, and received much less media attention. Nabila Rehman was 8 years old when she was out in a field picking okra and her grandmother was eviscerated before her eyes by a U.S. drone strike. Seven children were also wounded, including family members.

Nabila’s brother Zubair, a 13-year-old who was injured in the US drone attack, told the five congress-people decent enough to show up, “I no longer love blue skies. In fact, I now prefer grey skies. Drones don’t fly when sky is grey.” The Rehman family’s story was so dreadful that the translator burst into tears while telling it to Congress.

Given such a horrific report, you’d think the U.S. government would express interest in learning from it to make sure random civilians are not again slaughtered by bombs falling from microscopic dots in the sky. Yet only five (out of 435) House members attended the hearing.

Al Jazeera writer Murtaza Hussein noted that, in a symbol of the “utter contempt in which the government holds the people it claims to be liberating, while the Rehmans recounted their plight, Barack Obama was spending the same time meeting with the CEO of weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.”

Clearly, stoking the military-industrial complex that creates the Predator drones that havemurdered and injured thousands of innocent civilians is a higher priority for the president of the United States than meeting the actual victims of what can only correctly be referred to as state terrorism.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Malala Who Opposes Capitalism

Last year, I wrote a brief article titled Malala Yousafzai, Spivak, Abu-Lughod and the White Savior Complex. I noted that Gayatri Spivak, in her classic article "Can The Subaltern Speak?" explained that colonialist powers justify their draconian, parasitic rule with the belief that they are “white men are saving brown women from brown men.”

In her well-known essay, "Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?" Lila Abu-Lughod situated Spivak’s thesis in a contemporary setting, explaining how the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was justified with the exact same argument—the Bush administration was a group of overwhelmingly white leaders who consistently workedagainst women’s rights in their own country but now acted desperate to “save” Afghan women from Afghan men.

In his article Malala Yousafzai and the White Saviour Complex, journalist Assed Baig explored how this racist “white man’s burden” phenomenon is still alive and well, detailing the repugnant ways in which the West has exploited Malala Yousafzai’s amazing strength and bravery to support its interests.

Absent from many of these discussions, however, is that Malala herself is well aware of this manipulation. In a statement released on October 13, 2013, she defiantly declared that she is "not a Western puppet."

When discussing the way in which the neocolonialist West exploits and manipulates those working against oppression, one should be careful to establish that this is not done to them unwittingly. We are dealing with agents, individuals who understand the implications of their actions and change them accordingly. To forget this fact is, in a less overt way, to uphold the very paternalist, neocolonialist strictures we seek to destroy.

As Spivak reminds us, the subaltern indeed speaks—and not only speaks but resists oppressors. Articulated a bit differently, Arundhati Roy insisted, “There’s really no such thing as ‘the voiceless.’ There are only the deliberately silenced or the preferably unheard.”

The attempt to deliberately silence Malala is not only evident in the way the U.S. corporate media ignores her criticism of U.S. drones; even more insidious is its complete disregard for the Nobel Peace Prize laureate’s politics. In March 2013, Malala sent this message to the congress of Pakistani Marxists:

First of all, I’d like to thank The Struggle and the IMT [International Marxist Tendency] for giving me a chance to speak last year at their Summer Marxist School in Swat and also for introducing me to Marxism and Socialism. I just want to say that in terms of education, as well as other problems in Pakistan, it is high time that we did something to tackle them ourselves. It’s important to take the initiative. We cannot wait around for any one else to come and do it. Why are we waiting for someone else to come and fix things? Why aren’t we doing it ourselves?

I would like to send my heartfelt greetings to the congress. I am convinced Socialism is the only answer and I urge all comrades to take this struggle to a victorious conclusion. Only this will free us from the chains of bigotry and exploitation.

This is the Malala the Western corporate media doesn’t like to quote. This is the Malala whose politics do not fit neatly into the neocolonialist, cookie-cutter frame of presentation. This is the Malala who recognizes that true liberation will take more than just education, that it will take the establishment of not just bourgeois political “democracy,” but ofeconomic democracy, of socialism.

When the courageous activist speaks of the importance of education and nonviolence, the West shouts her words loudly from the media mountaintops. When that same activist criticizes predator drones and, that most sacrosanct entity of all, capitalism, the silence is deafening.

Only the distinctive buzzing of U.S. killer drones can be heard, watching and bombing overhead, protecting empire and “freedom.”

Source

moon-sylph:

therothwoman:

blairellis:

this never gets old

I met the creator of this a month ago and he said he got a lot of hate mail from dudebros who thought that he was a woman complaining about these problems.

This is spot-on

(Source: arrdeearr)

kaijubat:

moment of silence for all the star trek promos that look like awkward prom photos

(Source: ofhounds)

practicefortheheart:

amphigoricsymphony:

imrisah:

Old american west AUlock: Basically the greatest mind of the old west and the tiniest most deadly bounty hunter are hubbies and they kill baddies all around the country hellz yeah ヽ(°▽、°)ノ bye

fuck yes, Risah you are amazing

RISAH RISAH I LOVE YOU THIS IS PERFECT