I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: right-libertarians’ central critique of “socialism” is, nine times out of ten, a critique of the welfare state and accompanying social democratic policies. Hell, sometimes they’ll even equate socialism and corporatism, as if to imply that literally ANYTHING the government does is socialism (it doesn’t help when certain types of liberals go on to assert that, yes, cops and the military and libraries and public schools are indeed socialism). This is obviously some intensely ahistorical bullshit, and it’s just slightly more sophisticated parroting of standard Fox News establishment rhetoric (which makes it all that much funnier when they jump around insisting that they’re so subversive and against-the-grain). We know that billionaires love the right-libertarian “movement” because it gives them, again, a more sophisticated-sounding ideological justification in the eyes of people who claim to love human freedom. The Koch bros and others pump oodles of cash into these things because it means more capitalist boot-licking under the guise of liberation.

As a last resort, these think tanks push the “democracy is bad” mantra. If you’re a leftist, you know the drill – once you expose a libertarian’s utter lack of understanding with regard to what constitutes socialism (as a historic entity and as an ever-present movement designed to topple capitalism by replacing it with democratic worker-control of the means of production and collective utilities), they’ll concede that, you’re right, it’s actually not about dictators making decisions for you, it’s democratic control of the economy. At this point, they’ll argue “well, democracy is just mob rule”. So, simultaneously, socialism becomes an ideology of stuffy ivory tower autocrats deciding what’s best for everybody AND an ideology of the reckless mob of emotional proletarians brandishing their pitchforks at the person 51% of them don’t like.

I have a theory:

When libertarians fear the socialist boogeymen as the former “stuffy ivory tower autocrats”, it’s them projecting their own alienation and distaste for the current system onto the proposed antithesis – indeed, capitalism is already a system that puts autocrats in charge of the economic infrastructure and cultural superstructure by virtue of their ownership over the means of production, utilities, and land, all while the state functions primarily to maintain this ownership/management trend and the subsequent rifts between the people and the stuffy ivory tower autocrats. In this way, it’s almost like a shadow recognition on the libertarian’s part. It’s capitalism that pushes us all into identical worker uniforms at the behest of bosses and suppresses our creative and cooperative decision-making capacities to the domination of capital, and the suffocating bureaucracy of it all – in the workplace and with the state – leaves us choking. THAT system is more akin to the 1984 specter.

On the other side of the coin, when libertarians fear the socialist boogeymen as the latter “reckless mob of emotional proletarians”, it’s them projecting their own learned prejudices from this system – here, “the mob” becomes the wayward Other, the group the libertarian has learned to (consciously or subconsciously) despise as a byproduct of divide-and-conquer capitalist superstructure. That capitalist superstructure also relies on the idea that people are fundamentally rational individuals who make choices through a disembodied ego; the shadow of that rational individual is the emotionally-unstable sheep, a member of the lowly rabble with no self-control or personal initiative. Those sheep then come together to voice their collective concerns, an action that threatens the material interests of the rational individual (who owns the means of production and employs the sheep beneath him).

So are libertarians populists or elitists? Materially they’re elitists, but they’ll use either option rhetorically to win people over to their cause. Don’t fall for it. Their material interests are set firmly upon a status quo where eight “rational individuals” control more wealth than half the world’s people, where tangible human needs take a backseat to profit.

america chavez is a lesbian. she identifies as a lesbian. the marvel wiki lists her as a lesbian. she’s disgusted by men hitting on her and unashamedly loves women. so the fact that people, from fans to actual media outlets refuse to call her a lesbian is at best concerning at worst extremely lesbophobic. she’s not ambiguously queer. she’s not maybe bisexual, she is a LESBIAN. it’s not a bad word so say it.

Extreme Antagonist Acting Do’s and Don'ts in Film Examples

Bill Skarsgård- “It”

- Prepared thoroughly for the role, reading the novel, as well as putting an entirely new spin on the iconic character, receiving much praise, while having respect for the original. ( He’s 27)

- Was well aware when and when not to be in a dark place in order to portray Pennywise’s demented and demonic self. (As staying in those places mentally can prove to be detrimental to actor’s mental health.)

-Was extremely kind and helpful to his cast and crew, especially the children whom he worked with, making sure they were OK between takes, and treating them with the same respect he would treat any adult actor.

Jared Leto- “Suicide Squad”

-Sent cast members live rats, a pig carcass, anal beads, and used condoms as “gifts” from the Joker. This can be sourced by interviews with the cast on Youtube, (such as ‘Suicide Squad’: Will Smith talks about the crew relationship with Jared Leto’ ) where Will Smith talks about how Leto sent him a dead pig.

-Method acted as the Joker, creating an uneasy and distasteful environment to those he worked with. (Method acting is not supposed to do that.)

-His overall performance as the iconic character that many talented actors had played before ended up lacking variety despite it all.

I have never met these two in person, nor can I vouch for their character, but it says a lot about an actor in a working environment who is able to do their job well, as well as treat those they’re working with with respect and kindness.

anonymous asked:

Are we gonna see more dad!iwa and kageyama with Oikawa? I'm also curious how oikawa and iwa-chan meet in this au! :))

haha when I read the part  “ how oikawa and iwa-chan meet in this au” I got carried away ~ 

They share a common distaste for their boss, eventually they became friends.

Also yeaahh, in the future I’ll draw more about Dad!Iwa and his son + bf Oikawa

In [Harry Potter’s] Heartbeat

“Hi, Harry!” Hermione said brightly as she slid into the seat across from Harry at his table in the library.

“Hey, ‘Mione,” Harry responded absently, not breaking his gaze away from where Draco Malfoy sat, a few tables over. His Transfiguration essay lay forgotten on the table in front of him. Hermione rolled her eyes when she noticed that Harry had only written down two sentences.

“Listen, Harry, I was wondering if you could help me with some of my homework,” Hermione put forth.

Harry didn’t bother to reply this time. He probably wasn’t even listening, as he was far too distracted watching Draco saunter out of the library.


Harry abruptly turned his head to face Hermione.

“Oh, did you say something? Sorry, I was…” Harry paused and blushed an intense shade of puce. “Daydreaming,” he finished quickly and coughed. “What were you saying?”

Hermione shook her head in amusement at Harry’s obvious crush on Draco.

“I asked if you’d like to help me with an assignment for my Ancient Studies class,” Hermione said and Harry gasped.

“Hermione Granger is asking Harry Potter for help with an assignment? I never thought this day would come. Well, go on. What is it you need my brilliant mind for?”

Hermione chuckled and answered, “Lately we’ve been studying ways to invent new spells with theories and techniques from Ancient Magic. This assignment was to create a spell that would make an emotion sentient. For example, you could cast a spell to make someone’s anger  sentient and a fireball or something would show up and lead the person to things that made them angry. Anyways, I need you to be a test subject for my spell.”

Harry frowned. “So you don’t need my brilliant mind after all.” Then he asked, “Why isn’t Ron your test subject?”

“Oh, Ron’s too busy.”

Harry raised his eyebrows. “Doing what? Last I saw him, he was playing Wizard’s Poker with Dean and Seamus.”

“He’s busy now. Helping Ginny with Quidditch strategies for the match next week.”

“Funny. I wouldn’t think Ginny would need any help-”

Hermione cut him off by clearing her throat loudly. “The point is, I’m in need of a test subject and you’re available. Are you willing to help me?”

“Sure, I guess. Which emotion did you decide to do?” Harry said.


Harry suddenly looked very nervous. “What kind of love?”

Hermione shrugged. “I was aiming for romantic love, but the spell’s a work in progress. Could turn out to be any kind of love.”

“So the spell will lead me to who I love.”

Keep reading

MBTI types when they're with someone they hate/dislike
  • ESFP: They sense the whole room's vibe go down. Being the fun loving people they are, they ignore the person giving bad vibes and try to get the mood up by suggesting a game, challenge, etc. They hate to dwell on the negative
  • ISFP: They distance themselves as physically possible from the person and look for comfort from friends. Like the ESFP they don't like to dwell on the negative and prefer to look on to their close friends to bring up their spirits
  • ESTP: Tries to avoid the person but is tempted to do a prank or joke on them for fun. They obviously don't mean physical harm, but just a fun opportunity for them
  • ISTP: Has their "introvert mode on" at max. They are very snappy if the person talks to them and doesn't really consider their feelings when replying. They prefer to escape the situation to save their sanity
  • ESFJ: Being the kind hearted soul they are, they try to treat them like any other person. However whether they like it or not, they low-key give passive aggressive comments disguised with a "caring and happy" expression
  • ISFJ: Much like ESFJ except less noticeably passive aggressive. They actually may trick the person into thinking they're okay with them, but then ISFJ blows up to their close friends when they leave
  • ESTJ: Tries not to let their personal dislike to the person get to them, but it low-key does. They are more picky, impatient and dry when watching the person do something. Constant questioning them why they did what they did and how they SHOULD'VE done it. Actually they'll probably kick them out for being "irritating" or "slowing others down"
  • ISTJ: Pretty low-key about their distaste for the person. They silently criticize and judge what the person does but doesn't let them know. They believe heavily in karma and they are most likely to wait for the opportunity to screw with them at the right time
  • ENFP: Their happy-go-lucky mood is instantly dropped. They wish to not confront or come in contact with the person and may hide within their friends. They will try to keep up their normal behaviour but those close to them will notice their change in mood.
  • INFP: They may physically act very uncomfortable but will try and keep it together. They may be silent, almost as if they were daydreaming or trying to get their mind on to something else. As natural kind-hearted people, they wouldn't want to do anything to that person and will try to be civil with the person if confronted.
  • ENTP: They'd probably to just ignore that person's existence. They believe they don't need that kind of person near them and will do everything they can to just shut them away from their line of sight. Out of sight, out of mind.
  • INTP: you can tell by their unfiltered facial expressions they don't agree with that person being there. Depending on the level of hatred, they will either try to low-key troll them or just full on ignore them. They don't have much empathy left for that person so whatever they do, they won't regret.
  • ENFJ: Truthly ENFJs can be very vicious and might want to get back at the person. Of course they'd adhere to social rules and somehow turn the situation on to the person. It's easy for ENFJ to manipulate and sweet talk others into their side.
  • INFJ: More uncomfortable than usual around that particular person. They may want to immediately escape to be alone and calm down their thoughts. Then later go on a long rant to their friends about all the "stupid and dumb" things that person did and how it relates to them being a bad person
  • ENTJ: even with their scary reputation, they are probably more likely than ESTJ to avoid prejudice. They definitely will be a lot pickier and impatient, but will evaluate the person's actions and work objectively. Obviously they will be very high-key frustrated but will overall try to not let it get the best of them
  • INTJ: They will either go full "annoying nerd" mode or "don't breathe the same air as me" mode. They will continuously try to correct the person, trying to make them feel stupid or get annoyed by jusy their presence. They may not try to come after them but it will be clear when they would wish that person wasn't there.

concept: eddie takes up origami. he’s probably one of the only rogues with the patience and memory for it. jon leaves his work station for like 5 minutes and comes back to dozens of paper cranes spread all across his floor and work bench and is like edward wtf is this


Bucky Barnes X Barista!Reader

A/N: This is for @just-some-drabbles 4k follower challenge! Congrats, babe!

Thanks to my fake friend @denialanderror for beta’ing.

Words: 1718

Prompt: “I got your message. What the hell was that supposed to mean?”

Warnings: bad fluff again bc im a hoe for soft things but idk how to write soft things rip


Keep reading