The first primaries are coming up fast and if Bernie Sanders is going to turn his lead in the polls in early states into a primary victory young people NEED to vote. In just a few months all this activism comes to a head and Bernie Sanders has a very real chance at winning.

Bernie Sanders is already winning in two of these early states and by much wider margins than previous Democratic challenger candidates. This can become a real victory, it really can.

Unfortunately though there is a huge obstacle to overcome, a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters are young voters who consistently fail to show up to the polls come election day.

If young people turn out to vote though at rates far above 13%, even as low as 50%, that would be MASSIVE. That would fundamentally change how our government responds to the needs of young people. It is a tall order, but it isn’t that hard. Registering to vote isn’t that difficult and there is no reason that anyone should not be registered by the deadline. It needs to be done soon, but there is still plenty of time.

Okay actually, for some people there isn’t much time left. NEW YORKERS REGISTER TO VOTE NOW! Everyone else, there is some breathing room, but get on it. Below is a link to all the paper work you need, from there it is up to you. Share with your friends and family, help them register, help them get to the polls, and lets get Bernie Sanders elected president.

Register to vote in New York

Register to vote in Iowa

Register to vote in South Carolina

Register to vote in Nevada

Register to vote in Connecticut

Register to vote in New Hampshire

Register to vote in Arkansas

Register to vote in Tennessee

Register to vote in Texas

Register to vote in Georgia

Register to vote in Louisiana

Register to vote in North Carolina

Register to vote in Oklahoma

Register to vote in Michigan

Register to vote in Mississippi

Register to vote in Colorado

Register to vote in Virginia

Register to vote in Minnesota

Register to vote in Massachusetts

Register to vote in Maine

Register to vote in Ohio

Register to vote in Illinois

Register to vote in Kansas

Register to vote in Missouri

Register to vote in Alabama

Register to vote in Nebraska

Register to vote in Utah

Register to vote in Arizona

Register to vote in Vermont

Register to vote in Hawaii

Register to vote in Washington DC

Register to vote in Florida

Register to vote in Maryland

Register to vote in Wisconsin

Register to vote in Wyoming

Register to vote in Pennsylvania

Register to vote in Rhode Island

Register to vote in Delaware

Register to vote in Indiana

Register to vote in Kentucky

Register to vote in West Virginia

Register to vote in Oregon

Register to vote in Montana

Register to vote in New Mexico

Register to vote in New Jersey

Register to vote in California

Register to vote in South Dakota

Register to vote in Washington

Register to vote in Alaska

Register to vote in Idaho

Register to vote in North Dakota

Register to vote in Puerto Rico

It doesn’t stop there though, you need to know how to vote and how each primary election type is different.

BLUE STATES: Anyone of any party affiliation can vote for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic Primary.

RED STATES: Red states are closed primaries, meaning you MUST BE A REGISTERED DEMOCRAT. You need to be a Democrat if you want to vote for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary.

PURPLE STATES: Are Caucuses and the party affiliation required differs by state.

GREEN STATES: Most Green states are mixed primaries, meaning INDEPENDENTS or NON-AFFILIATED voters and DEMOCRATS can vote for Bernie Sanders. You can not vote for Bernie Sanders as a registered REPUBLICAN, in one of the red states.



american history books and american news outlets really do pretend the AIDS crisis never happened… i didn’t know a god damn thing about the AIDS crisis before i started reading articles online. the mainstream public tries very hard to pretend it did not happen

i just read a NYT article reassuring the american people that we “felt the way we feel about trump towards reagan too” and how “he ended up greatly improving the country”

and i’m like…. are you fucking serious? is 80,000+ deaths from AIDS by the end of his presidency alone not enough of a fucking failure to count?

this country has always turned a blind eye to our worst mistakes and refused to hold our leaders accountable and now that i’m older and i’m gay myself it burns me to think that society at large really just doesn’t care that reagan’s homophobia wiped out an entire generation of gay men & trans women and set the LGBT rights movement very, very far back

like that’s apparently just not relevant enough for them to criticize him for

[TRANS] 160327 Fan account of Jackson & JB during Inkigayo pre-recording

During today’s pre-recording jackson continuously greeted fans. Staff said: Get ready. But Gaga still kept waving ㅋㅋㅋㅋ Then JB: jackson get ready. (And) Gaga immediately stopped moving 😧😧😧 Why was this scene cute to the point I stood there three minutes fangirling     

Sometimes leadership takes tough love. It is not all about hand-holding and good vibes all of the time. Building someone up means always telling and leading in the truth. It’s not about sugar-coated phrases to make them feel good at the time. It’s about telling them what they need to hear in love, so that they can start to work on the core of their character; their foundation.
What Breaks My Heart Is When You Don't Hear Mine

I was published at! Here’s the post.
Check my book here on Amazon!

I’ve always had trouble approaching someone with a fragile ego, because I know if I say anything disagreeable or honest, they’ll defend themselves like crazy with a million excuses or throw insults or throw things off the desk or make ugly-cry-face and cut me off for a month.

I know this because it’s me too. It’s hard to hear the truth about yourself. It’s hard to confront the ugliness inside.

But confronting yourself is the only way to be truly liberated from the lies we believe. Without rebuke, we’re left sauntering in an unseen momentum of darkness that threatens to destroy us by a gradual downhill fade. The most dangerous way to die is slowly, unaware, in descent.

A few years ago, one of my best friends was messing up with something. No one else knew but me. It probably wasn’t a big deal, and no one would’ve been hurt if he continued, but as a friend I had to bring it up. I really didn’t want to, but I couldn’t just sit by.

My friend is the coolest guy in the world. I’ve never seen him rage out or say a harsh word in his life. He was the kind of guy who would walk away from a group the second they began to gossip, who wouldn’t hesitate to break up a street fight on his way home.

But even when I bring the truth to the coolest people: I’ve seen the worst come out of them. There’s always a mirror-defense where they decide to bring up your grievances, or a lot of casual dismissal, or loud angry hostility. Honestly, I was jaded to this sort of thing whenever I tried to confront someone, and I expected it to go bad just like with everyone else.


On a Friday, we were hanging out at my place and I sat him down and started with the ominous statement, “I have to talk to you about something.” My voice shook for that entire sentence. If I wasn’t sitting down, my knees probably would’ve been shaking too.

I told him everything. I said, “I don’t want anyone else to say something bad about you, that’s why I’m saying this. You’re my friend, you’re my brother, I want the best for you.”

After I was done, I braced myself. I physically reeled back, waiting for the shouting match.

My friend said, “Thank you”—and then he stood up without a word and went to the door, and he left.

For some reason, this was worse. I couldn’t sleep that night. I thought I had totally screwed this up. Friendship, ruined. Years of loyalty, over. I kept going over what I said in my brain, all the ways I should’ve worded it differently.

The next day, my friend came by. He sat me down, the same place, the same chairs. He said, “I thought about what you said. And you’re right. I’m going to stop immediately.”

My entire body unclenched. To be truthful, I almost wept. I hate to cry in front of people, but I was just so dang relieved. Some of it was because I was emotionally tightened up, and some of it was my anxiety that I was no longer his friend. But mostly I couldn’t believe that another human being actually considered what I said and thought it was the best course of action, so he changed his life over it. I was astonished.

It would’ve been OK if he cussed me out, or never spoke to me again, or kept living his life as before. I would’ve understood. I still would’ve loved him the same. No one owes me anything, and this is not about him “following me.” But the plot-twist is that he actually listened. Not to me, but to wisdom. I can’t remember a time when it happened so clean, so quickly, so graciously.

He stuck to his word. He stopped. He went out of his way to make sure it never happened again. And I never tried to play around about it, I never said “I told you so” or “It’s better now, right” or “Aren’t you glad you listened.” If anything, we grew closer and stronger. I was one of the groomsmen for his wedding.


The simple truth is that if you haven’t been told you’re wrong in a long time, you probably have no real friends. And you might not be a great friend, either, because everyone’s too scared to tell you what’s really real. But even then, it’s uncomfortable and icky and awkward, and if you ever get to that place of rebuke and honesty, there will be a space of tension where the friendship hangs in the balance. Yet true friends are willing to risk the friendship out of love for each other, because being a friend is not a fun-filled fantasy where it’s all giggles and games. Friends also sharpen one another, to be our truest best selves, that we might move forward to greater joy.

Of course, there will be an initial emotional reaction. There will be dumb rationalizations and a sudden list of “Well, what about you.” And I hope you can push past this. I hope you don’t take it too personally. Every creature has an instinct of self-preservation, and if you call me out, I will naturally fight back until I feel safe enough to let my guard down. The only thing we can do is to endure the scratching and stumble through those first reactions, and maybe we can move past this part a little quicker each time.

I also don’t mean we call out everything that bothers us. There’s plenty to just let go. I don’t mean we become behavior-police or try to catch a slip-up all the time. Sometimes it’s not your job. I’ve been there, and that’s not friendship either. Being accountable is nothing without love and vision, and if you have a self-satisfying relish when you rebuke, you’re not in it for your friend, but yourself. None of this is about ultimatums or “getting things off my chest.” It’s because I love you too much to stay silent.

I hope we can pursue rebuke, to pursue truth. I hope we are not only surrounded by yes-men and glad-handlers and kiss-ups. I hope we are not overly sensitive to spiritual surgery. I hope you can run through my overreactions and get to that core inside, where you believe I can do better, and you sincerely do love me. I hope you will hear my heart breaking.

– J.S. Park

wow, blizzard being hesitant to reveal gay characters out of the fear of losing audiences? that’s new. 

remember that time they celebrated marriage equality laws passing with a disembodied rainbow fist because they didn’t have any explicitly LGBT characters to put in the spotlight? because i do.

remember when blizzard shut down an lgbt guild in WoW because it wasn’t “appropriate for the high fantasy setting of WoW” and then threatened to ban the leader’s account for life if she didn’t cease and desist? because i do.

remember in just 2014, when overwatch was first being teased, that they said “I wouldn’t say [Diversity]’s really a value for us. It’s not something that we’re against either, but it’s just not … something we’re trying to actively do.”? because i do. 

it’s almost like blizzards rampant homophobia is one of the prime reasons i was wary about overwatch to begin with!

Colossians 3:18
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

When God created woman from man He said, “It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.” God created woman to be a perfectly suitable helper to the man. This means God gave the plan and agenda to Adam, and he and the woman together work to fulfill it. God gives to man the responsibility (and the accountability) to be the leader in the home and Church and gives to the woman the responsibility and the accountability to help him. We only see “helping” as a position of inferiority when we think like the world thinks. God considers positions of service as most important in His sight (Matthew 20:25-28). Not only was the woman to be a helper, but also she was made comparable to the man. She should be considered and honored as such. A woman or wife cannot be regarded as a mere tool or worker, but as an equal partner in God’s grace and an equal human being.

The apostle Paul wrote in both Ephesians and Colossians, “Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord” and without proper context and study that would seem to pretty much make women inferior but as everything in life, context is key. Sadly, it’s hard to find those who really care to understand the context of passage or to study the original language in which the text was written.

The ancient Greek word translated as submit is essentially a word borrowed from the military. It literally means “to be under in rank.” It speaks of the way that an army is organized among levels of rank, with generals and colonels and majors and captains and sergeants and privates. There are levels of rank, and one is obligated to respect those in higher rank.

We know that as a person, a private can be smarter, more talented, and be a better person than a general. But he is still under rank to the general. He isn’t submitted to the general so much as a person as he is to the general as a general. In the same way, the wife doesn’t submit to her husband because he deserves it. She submits because he is her husband.

The idea of submission doesn’t have anything to do with someone being smarter or better or more talented. It has to do with a God-appointed order. Anyone who has served in the armed forces knows that rank has to do with order and authority, not with value or ability.

Therefore, submission means you are part of a team. If the family is a team, then the husband is “captain” of the team. The wife has her place in relation to the “captain,” and the children have their place in relation to the “captain” and the wife.

The form of the verb shows that the submission is to be voluntary. The wife’s submission is never to be forced on her by a demanding husband; it is the deference that a loving wife, conscious that her home (just as any other institution) must have a head.

The phrase “submit to your own husbands” defines the sphere of a wife’s submission. The Bible never commands nor recommends a general submission of women unto men. It is commanded only in the spheres of the home and in the Church (and one of the reasons why women can’t be leading pastors in the Church). God does not command that men have exclusive authority in the areas of politics, business, education, and so on.

The phrase “as is fitting in the Lord” is absolutely crucial. It colors everything else we understand about this passage. There have been two main “wrong” interpretations of this phrase, each favoring a certain position:

  1. The interpretation that “favors” the husband says that as is fitting in the Lord means that a wife should submit to her husband as if he were God himself. The idea is “you submit to God in absolutely everything without question, so you must submit to your husband in the same absolute way.” This thinks that as is fitting in the Lord defines the extent of submission. But this is wrong. Simply put, in no place does the Scripture say that a person should submit to another in that way. There are limits to the submission your employer can expect of you. There are limits to the submission the government can expect of you. There are limits to the submission parents can expect of children. In no place does the Scripture teach an unqualified, without exception, submission - except to God and God alone. To violate this is to commit the sin of idolatry.
  2. The interpretation that “favors” the wife says that as is fitting in the Lord means “I’ll submit to him as long as he does what the Lord wants.” And then it is the wife’s job to decide what the Lord wants. This thinks that as is fitting in the Lord defines the limit of submission. This is also wrong. It is true that there are limits to a wife’s submission, but when the wife approaches as is fitting in the Lord in this way, then it degenerates into a case of “I’ll submit to my husband when I agree with him. I’ll submit to him when he makes the right decisions and carries them out the right way. When he makes a wrong decision, he isn’t in the Lord, so I shouldn’t submit to him then. It isn’t fitting to do so.” Simply put, that is not submission at all. Except for those who are just plain cantankerous and argumentative, everyone submits to others when they are in agreement. It is only when there is a disagreement that submission is tested.

As is fitting in the Lord does not define the extent of a wife’s submission. It does not define the limit of a wife’s submission. It defines the motive of a wife’s submission. It means, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands because it is a part of your duty to the Lord, because it is an expression of your submission to the Lord.” They submit simply because it is fitting in the Lord to do it. It honors God’s Word and His order of authority. It is part of their Christian duty and discipleship.

Therefore, as is fitting in the Lord means:

• For wives, submission to their husband is part of their Christian life.
• When a wife doesn’t obey this word to submit to your own husband as is fitting in the Lord, she doesn’t just fall short as a wife. She falls short as a follower of Jesus Christ.
• This means that the command to submit is completely out of the realm of “my nature” or “my personality.” Wives aren’t expected to submit because they are the “submissive type.” They are expected to submit because it is fitting in the Lord.
• This has nothing to do with your husband’s intelligence or giftedness or capability. It has to do with honoring the Lord Jesus Christ.
• This has nothing to do with whether or not your husband is “right” on a particular issue. It has to do with Jesus being right.
• This means that a woman should take great care in how she chooses her husband. Remember, ladies: this is what God requires of you in marriage. This is His expectation of you. Instead of looking for an attractive man, instead of looking for a wealthy man, you better first look for a man you can respect.

As is the case in every human relationship, the command to submit is not absolute. There are exceptions to this command for a wife to submit to her own husband:

• When the husband asks the wife to sin, she must not submit.
• When the husband is medically incapacitated, insane, or under the influence of mind altering substances, the wife may not submit.
• When the husband is violent and physically threatening, the wife may not submit.
• When the husband breaks the marriage bond by adultery, the wife does not need to submit to her husband being in an adulterous relationship.

And finally, Paul finishes that verse in Colossians by saying, “Husbands, love your wives and do not be bitter toward them.

Paul’s words to husbands safeguards his words to wives. Though wives are to submit to their husbands, it never excuses husbands acting as tyrants over their wives. Instead, a husband must love his wife, and the ancient Greek word translated as love here is agape.

Significantly, this puts an obligation upon the husbands in here. In the ancient world - under Jewish, Greek, and Roman customs, all power and privileges belonged to husbands in regard to wives, to fathers in regard to children, and to masters in regard to slaves. There were no complimentary powers or privileges on the part of wives, children, or slaves.

The verb agapao does not denote affection or romantic attachment; it rather denotes caring love, a deliberate attitude of mind that concerns itself with the well-being of the one loved.

Strictly speaking, agape can’t be defined as “God’s love,” because men are said to agape sin and the world (John 3:191 John 2:15). But it can be defined as a sacrificial, giving, absorbing, love. The word has little to do with emotion; it has much to do with self-denial for the sake of another.

Some can read this passage and think that Paul means, “Husband, be kind to your wife.” Or “Husband, be nice to your wife.” There is no doubt that for many marriages, this would be a huge improvement. But that isn’t what Paul writes about. What he really means is, “Husband, continually practice self-denial for the sake of your wife.”

Of course, this agape love is the kind of love Jesus has for His people and this is the love husbands should imitate towards their wives (Ephesians 5:25).

The implication of “And do not be bitter toward them” is perhaps the wife has given the husband some reason to be bitter. Paul says, “That doesn’t matter, husband.” The husband may feel perfectly justified in his harsh or unloving attitude and actions towards his wife, but he is not justified - no matter how the wife has been towards the husband.

Agape loves even when there are obvious and glaring deficiencies, even when the receiver is unworthy of the love.

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her

Paul’s words to Christian husbands safeguards his previous words to wives. Though wives are to submit to their husbands, it never excuses husbands acting as tyrants over their wives.

As Martyn Lloyd-Jones put it, "It is not naked power, it is not the power of a dictator or a little tyrant, it is not the idea of a man who arrogates to himself certain rights, and tramples upon his wife’s feelings and so on, and sits in the home as a dictator. No husband is entitled to say that he is the head of the wife unless he loves his wife. So the reign of the husband is to be a reign and a rule of love; it is a leadership of love.”

Jesus’ attitude towards the church is a pattern for the Christian husband’s love to his wife. This shows that the loveless marriage doesn’t please God and does not fulfill His purpose. This is love given to the undeserving. This is love given first. This is love that may be rejected, but still loves.

Charles Spurgeon said this, “It is possible that some husbands might say, ‘How can I love such a wife as I have?’ It might be a supposable case that some Christian was unequally yoked together with an unbeliever, and found himself for ever bound with a fetter to one possessed of a morose disposition, of a forward temper, of a bitter spirit. He might therefore say, 'Surely I am excused from loving in such a case as this. It cannot be expected that I should love that which is in itself so unlovely.’ But mark, beloved, the wisdom of the apostle. He silences that excuse, which may possibly have occurred to his mind while writing the passage, by taking the example of the Savior, who loved, not because there was loveliness in his Church, but in order to make her lovely.”

We might say that Paul taught two things at once here. He taught about the nature of the relationship between husband and wife, and he taught about the relationship between Christ and His Church. Each illustrates important principles about the other.

Jesus’ action towards the church is a pattern. This helps us define what agape love is all about: it is self-sacrificing love. How should a husband love his wife? As Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it. What did that involve? Perhaps the best statement concerning that matter is in Philippians 2:5-8, where it shows that the focus of Jesus was on the church. It was for the church that He did what He did, not for Himself.

This word is especially needful for husbands who see headship in submission with worldly understanding instead of godly understanding. Some husbands think that because God said they are the head of the home and the wife is obligated to submit to them that they do not have to be humble, lay down their lives, and sacrifice for the benefit of their wife. They need to understand the difference in thinking between worldly headship and godly headship.

  • Worldly headship says, “I am your head, so you take your orders from me and must do whatever I want.”
  • Godly headship says, “I am your head, so I must care for you and serve you.”
  • Worldly submission says, “You must submit to me, so here are the things I want you to do for me.”
  • Godly submission says, “You must submit to me, so I am accountable before God for you. I must care for you and serve you.”

This is not the height of romantic love as the world knows it. This isn’t love based on looks, image, the ability to be suave and cutting-edge cool. This is love expressed through sacrifice.

I can’t invest as much time into the game as I used to so I want this stuff to go to someone who will use it!


A code for:

  • 4☆ (Song of Justice) Chiaki Morisawa


An account with:

  • 4☆ (Cooking Leader) Arashi Narukami
  • 4☆ (Trainer’s Smile) Yuzuru Fushimi
  • 4☆ (Pace Down) Izumi Sena
  • 4☆ (Cautious Gaze) Hokuto Hidaka 
  • There are also some cards from SakuraFes (event and scout)!


You don’t have to be following me!

Reblogs only; only the first one will count!

Giveaway ends Saturday, Feb 27 at 5:00 PM EST. 

There will be two winners; if the first winner doesn’t respond within 24 hours the second winner will choose first!

Message me with any questions and good luck♪

Congratulations to the two winners♪

To Defeat ISIS, We Must Call Both Western and Muslim Leaders to Account

And that includes the Saudi kings whose funding of Wahhabi doctrine gave rise to the scourge of Islamic extremism.

Flowers are put in a window shattered by a bullet as Paris mourns the victims of a terrorist attack. (AP Photo / Peter Dejong)

by Laila Lalami

What happened in Paris on November 13 has happened before, in a shopping district of Beirut on November 12, in the skies over Egypt on October 31, at a cultural center in Turkey on July 20, a beach resort in Tunisia on June 26—and nearly every day in Syria for the last four years.

The scenario is by now familiar to all of us. News of the killings will appear on television and radio. There will be cries of horror and sorrow, a few hashtags on Twitter, perhaps even a change of avatars on Facebook. Our leaders will make staunch promises to bring the terrorists to justice, while also claiming greater power of surveillance over their citizens. And then life will resume exactly as before.

We owe these families, of every race, creed, and nationality, more than sorrow, more than anger. We owe them justice.

We must call to account ISIS, a nihilistic cult of death that sees the world in black and white, with no shades of gray in between.

We must call to account Bashar al-Assad, whose response to peaceful protesters in the spring of 2011 was to send water cannons and military tanks to meet them.

We must call to account the governments of the United States, France, Britain, Russia, Iran, and many others, who lent support and succor to tyrant after tyrant in the Middle East and North Africa, and whose interventions appear to create 10 terrorists for every one they kill.

We must call to account George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, whose disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003 and subsequent disbanding of the Iraqi army destabilized the entire region.

Wahhabi ideas have spread throughout the region not because they have any merit—but because they are well funded.

We must call to account the Saudi kings—Salman, Abdullah, and Fahd—whose funding of Wahhabi doctrine gave rise to the scourge of Islamic extremism.

When I was a child in Morocco, no clerics told me what to do, what to read or not read, what to believe, what to wear. And if they did, I was free not to listen. Faith was more than its conspicuous manifestations. But things began to change in the 1980s. It was the height of the Cold War and Arab tyrants saw an opportunity: They could hold on to power indefinitely by repressing the dissidents in their midst—most of them secular leftists—and by encouraging the religious right wing, with tacit or overt approval from the United States and other Western allies. Into the void created by the decimation of the Arab world’s secular left, the Wahhabis stepped in, with almost unlimited financial resources. Wahhabi ideas spread throughout the region not because they have any merit—they don’t—but because they were and remain well funded. We cannot defeat ISIS without defeating the Wahhabi theology that birthed it. And to do so would require spending as much effort and money in defending liberal ideas.

The government of Saudi Arabia has beheaded more people this year than ISIS.

I am a novelist. Every year, I spend a great deal of my time giving readings or lectures at which, almost unfailingly, I am asked about Islam and Muslims and the wars now consuming the Middle East. I try to explain and contextualize, remind people about history and politics, bring in some culture and art into the mix. But every few months, when another terrorist attack happens, the work I do seems to be for nothing. What chance does someone like me have when compared with the power of well-funded networks?

The beheadings, the crucifixions, the destruction of cultural heritage that ISIS practices—none of these are new. They all happened, and continue to happen, in Saudi Arabia too. The government of Saudi Arabia has beheaded more people this year than ISIS. It persecutes Shias and atheists. It has slowly destroyed sites of cultural and religious significance around Mecca and Medina. To almost universal indifference, it has been bombing Yemen for seven months. Yet whenever terror strikes, it escapes notice and evades responsibility. In this, it is aided and abetted by Western governments, who buy oil from tyrants and sell them weapons, while paying lip service to human rights.

Muslims are the primary victims of ISIS—and its primary resisters.

I have no patience anymore for people who claim that Muslims do not speak out. They do, every day. Muslims are the primary victims of ISIS, and its primary resisters. It is an insult to every one of the hundreds of thousands of Muslim victims of terrorism to lump them with the lunatics who commit terror. The truth is that ISIS unleashes its nihilistic violence on anyone—Muslim, Christian or Jew; believer or unbeliever—who doesn’t subscribe to their cult.

I wish I could do something for the victims of terrorist violence. But I am a writer; words are all I have. And all I know is that I want, with all my heart, to preserve and celebrate what ISIS wishes to destroy: a multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-cultural life.


A photo of a mother who had died holding on to her child during the flood in Accra, went viral yesterday. It reminded me of this photo from when my youngest was a baby.

The amount of rain that caused a flood in Accra, killing many, shouldn’t even have killed a fly but the city is choked with corrupt officials who will take bribe and sell or register any piece of land, whether it is a waterway or not, indisciplined citizens who openly throw their garbage into gutters and wherever they can find space, an incompetent government that keeps promising but never delivers and a waste management company that pretends to pay their employees and so their employees also pretend to work.

Accra is a mess. It is filthy and stinky and stuck back in time. Accra is not a place. It’s a people. If our environments are filthy, it is because we are filthy.

We need a socio-cultural revolution in this city. We need to hold each other accountable. We need to hold our traditional and political leaders accountable. We need to hold ourselves accountable.

Photo and Words by Nana Kofi Acquah ( @africashowboy (Copyright: 2015).

Made with Instagram