"Solidarity is an act, a series of acts, a lifetime of choices and self-education, a deeply felt human compassion, NOT a button on your goddamn denim vest. Or, even really a matter of identity, when it comes right down to it." - this seems extremely important to remember (via conradtao)

how to tell if an ~edgy and radikewl~ public figure/artist/publication etc is actually politically relevant and not just full of shit 

missvoltairine:

  • do they have any ties to the community that they work out of
  • what do they contribute to that community
  • do they actually do anything to make life better for the people in their vicinity or do they just talk a lot without actually making an impact on anyone
  • like, what has Banksy done for youth living in poverty in London or wherever he’s from?
  • what has Adbusters done for people in east Vancouver who are trying to live and organize and resist in an environment of really extreme class conflict?
  • if you can’t think of an answer to these questions, how much is the commentary of a bunch of people who aren’t actually involved in any on-the-ground work to improve peoples’ lives actually worth?
  • especially when that commentary is in the form of “radical” art that appropriates the styles and techniques of poor artists and artists of colour, styles and techniques which were developed specifically in response to a lack of access to formal art education, expensive materials, to the criminalization of expression within specific communities, etc
  • looking at you, Banksy, and other “street artists” who hate on graffiti artists and taggers from your galleries with your giant fucking grants and agency representation
  • and at you, Adbusters, who took poor peoples’ critical responses to consumerist culture and turned them into another fucking brand with your “black spot” clothing

Helping a kid I know edit their resume… THEY PUT PROTESTS THEY’VE BEEN TO ON THEIR RESUME. THIS IS PEAK WHITE LIBERAL PRIVILEGE. OH MY GOD. OH MY GOD I CAN’T EVEN DEAL WITH THIS. PEOPLE DO THIS??? PEOPLE PUT THIS ON GODDAMN ReSUMES

Native American Women Expose Brutal Life of Prostitution 

re-interpellated:

Prostitution is not only good for patriarchy and capitalism, but for colonialism and white supremacy as well.

"By the end of the century, the world may well have to accommodate ten billion inhabitants—roughly the equivalent of adding two new Indias. Sustaining that many people will require farmers to grow more food in the next seventy-five years than has been produced in all of human history. For most of the past ten thousand years, feeding more people simply meant farming more land. That option no longer exists; nearly every arable patch of ground has been cultivated, and irrigation for agriculture already consumes seventy per cent of the Earth’s freshwater." -

Michael Specter on Vandana Shiva’s crusade against genetically modified crops. I rarely read something that changes my opinion as quickly and completely as this article. (via maxistentialist)

I have a problem with this sentiment. Messing with crop-growing is a long-established practice, and the modern problems with GMO crops has less to do with crop production and more to do with the corporatization of agriculture to the detriment of farmers who practice sustainable agriculture. 

Also the moral panic surrounding “WE KEEP REPRODUCING” is another capitalist fallacy. Capitalism requires more and more consumers, hence it encourages reproduction. The solution ISN’T, however, to keep supporting capitalist practices. Remove the social (and capitalist) pressure to reproduce, give everyone a decent education and access to birth control AND proper childcare, and we will see population levels even out. I’m p sure there’s a study on this out there. 

This article is even MORE hella problematic since it cites India as an example of how overpopulation affects food sources. The article states that “more than one study has concluded that if India had stuck to its traditional farming methods millions would have starved”. This is really disingenuous and kind of ignorant because starvation at these rates is not about the farming practices, it’s about food distribution practices, which have been changed by British rule (see Late Victorian Holocausts by Mike Davis).

I want to read a study about how reverting to pre-colonial, pre-capitalist food distribution systems would affect starvation, but that wouldn’t make money or contribute to GDP. 

So yeah, the outcry about rising populations not matching food consumption is in itself an imperialist, white supremacist position on issues of food justice, environmental sustainability AND reproductive justice. 

(via inlovewiththepractice)

She already said it and I’m going to reiterate: I’m over them talking about how “more people will mean more food” or even conversations about starvation right now that refuse to account for how we do, in fact, make (more than) enough food right now for everyone and that the malnutrition and starvation has nil to do with “lack of food” and everything to do with capitalist corporate monopoly on the distribution of food and how so much of it sits in warehouses to rot because they  can’t part with it because it wouldn’t be profitable.

Plus that I mean, can we even talk about how advanced we are in tech? We are completely capable of developing vertical farms and don’t have to use GMOs that disrupt local ecosystems. We are completely capable of switching to sustainable resources for energy. These things are not available not because the tech is unavailable or unattainable, but because it would not be “profitable” which at core shows the issue with the capitalist system as it is right now.

Same applies to the water needed for irrigation. Water moves in a cycle in an ecosystem; we are more than capable of building closed ecosystem agricultural systems that do not require excessive use of water. Building says systems would take a few years; as the water is closed into the system the rest of the environment would adjust itself, as ecosystems are wont to do.

Goodness.

pax-arabica:

angryiraqi:

oparnoshoshoi:

blardenfrazifonochip:

baghdadinvest:

Muslims against ISIS…… because we don’t want the 0.01% representing the 99.99%

To all of you racists out there posting “I don’t see Muslims protesting ISIS”

Muslims, leaps and bounds beyond christians and cops.

This post is so fucking nasty especially that disgusting comment above mine

I’m so sick and tired of us having to convince other people of our humanity every time any Muslim in the world farts.
How many times do we need to open up with disclaimers when discussing something? How many times do you hear a Muslim begin their statement with “I’m a proud American/British/etc citizen and am against terror” before they dare to practice their free speech, and god forbid, criticize the country they live in?
How many times do you hear westerners start up with a disclaimer when they want to talk about the Middle East/North Africa/anywhere on the planet? How many of them begin with “Oh first of all I’d like to denounce colonialism and imperialism”? 
I’m not apologizing for anything any Muslim ever does or has done, because I am not the bloody spokesperson for a fifth of the whole planet. We do not need to prove anything to anyone.
Our actions should be purely in solidarity and support for Iraqis and Syrians menaced by ISIS, and any other group really in any part of the world currently suffering.
It should never be an attempt to “prove” our humanity and to try and win brownie points from apathetic westerners with more blood on their hands than a thousand ISIS could ever manage.

pax-arabica:

angryiraqi:

oparnoshoshoi:

blardenfrazifonochip:

baghdadinvest:

Muslims against ISIS…… because we don’t want the 0.01% representing the 99.99%

To all of you racists out there posting “I don’t see Muslims protesting ISIS”

Muslims, leaps and bounds beyond christians and cops.

This post is so fucking nasty especially that disgusting comment above mine

I’m so sick and tired of us having to convince other people of our humanity every time any Muslim in the world farts.

How many times do we need to open up with disclaimers when discussing something? How many times do you hear a Muslim begin their statement with “I’m a proud American/British/etc citizen and am against terror” before they dare to practice their free speech, and god forbid, criticize the country they live in?

How many times do you hear westerners start up with a disclaimer when they want to talk about the Middle East/North Africa/anywhere on the planet? How many of them begin with “Oh first of all I’d like to denounce colonialism and imperialism”? 

I’m not apologizing for anything any Muslim ever does or has done, because I am not the bloody spokesperson for a fifth of the whole planet.
We do not need to prove anything to anyone.

Our actions should be purely in solidarity and support for Iraqis and Syrians menaced by ISIS, and any other group really in any part of the world currently suffering.

It should never be an attempt to “prove” our humanity and to try and win brownie points from apathetic westerners with more blood on their hands than a thousand ISIS could ever manage.

I love lostintrafficlights's aesthetic tbh it's all flowery and flowy and you'd think they're like, super quiet and shy and whatever but then someone comes out with some BS and they're all up there like EXCUSE ME MOFO YOU THINK I'M GONNA LET YOU PASS WITH THAT? YOU THINK I'M GONNA LET YOU WALK OVER ME AND THE PPL I FCK WITH? YOU THOUGHT WRONG MOFO YOU'RE ABOUT TO BE BROUGHT DOWN

I love it.

Liberals wanna talk about racism and global oppression and “saving the world” and not deal with how it was liberal capitalists with their “free trade!” and saviour complex turned racism and eugenics that did most of the destruction with colonialism and new imperialism smh get over your fucking selves